How many of you are agnostic or don't know what to believe in? Is there any way to really find a truly unbiased source? How many think you've had an actual experience with God ?
Can respect the logic in that pic. Focusing on how you actually live your life means a great deal more than anything you can "faithfully" believe.
Even if unbiased sources exists, unbiased indexes of such sources don't exist, so you won't be able to find them. It's just as well, though, because the mere act of thinking about forces beyond reality is a way to obtain cognitive biases.
Haven't had an experience with god because every force that has ever tried to lord over me has ripped itself apart to prevent itself from meeting me.
an example of a purely unbiased source by right of its very nature would be simple things like the Mandelbrot set. Mathematics likes geometry. Pi and golden proportions and all of the physics that we've been conjuring up are in geometric form of all sorts of things. the issue is very clear then we cannot know what to believe or interpret from the shapes and such of diagrams like the Mandelbrot so we try explaining the process of it, like whether it is an active manipulator behind the motion or a passive and automatic motion by design. "Natural" sources aren't even local, the vacuum is an automatic machine expressed removedly from the "expressor" of the golden ratio, leaving the supermachinery the individual parts in its function as something even more "automatic" if you can follow that...
I believe the same. I don't really believe in organized religion but do an awful lot of charity work. I just try to live my life the best that I can to be beneficial to the people and community around me. Being a good person and being religious aren't one in the same to me.
This is literally the most biased common dogma on planet Earth at the moment. There are millions of people that firmly believe in science despite having done exactly zero scientific experiments in their life. There is zero reproducability among fans of science, and science fiction governs funding far more than actual engineering potential does. There is literally zero reason for anyone to take science seriously except for faith in academia. Which is on the fast decline because the social processes that led to rigorous academia were replaced with faith during the 20th century. The scientific institution is crumbling hard and it'll be a miracle if the actual science that's getting done will ever get credit for it.
The idea that reality mimics math rather than math mimicking reality has no common basis in rational thought.
a truly unbiased source
I'm no philosopher but I would bet that philosophers have wet their pants over this one for a thousand years.
I don't know, but one indication might be if someone says, 'my way is the Truth' then avoid like the plague. On the other hand, if someone says, 'I've got some ideas, see what resonates with you, take what is useful', then there is a good bet they aren't out to shaft you.
>How many of you are agnostic or don't know what to believe in?
The majority believe in ghosts. I doubt there's many agnostics.
>Is there any way to really find a truly unbiased source?
No. Easiest thing to do is look at all sources and find the ones with the most compelling/verifiable arguments.
>How many think you've had an actual experience with God ?
No one has.
Discordian here. AMA.
or don't, I don't care.
How come Queenie didn't recognize Ramona Royale, if she looks identical to Marie La Vois?
He's right though, everyone was born to simply RP.
There's no way for you to prove the you who actually is, isn't just some facade you've played out since becoming conscious about your surroundings.
We've been RPing for so long that we lost the ability to see what actuality is and who we really are.
>There's no way for you to prove the you who actually is
There is though. It requires a fuckton of trust on my part, but it can be done. It's not impossible. If you were alluding to enlightened reasoning, that'd be preferable, but I can also prove my fundamental identity if need be. I'd rather no such need be, but I can do it.
Kek kek kek.
That's not even remotely similar to my view. I don't take belief as a stance on which facts exists, but a stance on which facts ought to exist. For me to be a nihilist, I'd have to believe that nothing was supposed to exist. To be atheist, I'd have to believe that gods weren't supposed to exist. I doubt I'll end up on either philosophy, but I'll try to get there if I can.
I don't actually believe that belief systems have anything to do with the notion of an afterlife.
You can prove 100% without a doubt that the person you once weren't is the same as the person you are now?
The logic doesn't make sense, we came from the void therefore we are nothing but the void.
The person you are now is no more then the person you've been shaped/chose to become.
Everything and everyone is RP. There is nothing wrong with becoming so. Without it we would not exist.
The soul and body are the prisons of man.
The spirit, is the light that frees us.
Those who seek to become nothing, only do so that they may become whole again.
It may be very possible that "you" are all that is real.
But I am here, and so is the world. Therefore you are no longer whole.
1. Don't know what to believe in. Gods are just facets of the humans that preach them,, hard physics is tainted, just like anon mentioned here: >>17206046 and I've consumed as much info as I can, and it seems like all humans are inherently wicked, so I just hang out on 4chan and await my early demise. Fuck everyone and post fucking cats.
2. ALL info is biased, even the computer screen you're observing. However, we can get past our biases slowly with corroboration, as memetics and science has shown. I feel the most unbiased source of info is to ask someone who has experience in the field you're enquiring about. If you wanna know something that is unkown to everyone, then you need to rope people together and collaborate on the problem. Unless you're a fucking pleb genius, but then why the fuck would you be on 4chan?
3. No experience with god, but did smoke salvia alone in the woods once and was overtaken by a 'force' that called themselves/itself "The Darkness", which offered to take me with it into a higher dimension, but I couldn't come back to this one. I refused, but as the Darkness was leaving me, it let me know that it would always be waiting for the time when I chose to come with it. I haven't smoked salvia since...
P.S. Awesome pic to start a convo with, OP.
I don't really feel like you being separate from me detracts from my inherent nothingness in any way.
Have you ever thought about the concept of a grand, timeless, crystalline everything? Has it occurred to you that that thing, that one thing that could be called everything, can't actually exist without destroying free will? Every moment of your experience is evidence that the singular "everything" concept does not exist.
Even if every little thing in existence were to exist all at once, "everything" would still fail to exist. Isn't that cool?
lol free will
doesn't exist, you're as programmed as an ant. Under pressure you revert to type and do what you have been scripted to do. The concept of free will can be entertained if you sit around thinking about stuff in comfort.
Now your human brain, being as complex as it is, can have anomalous waveforms in the electrical activity across billions of connections. This can sometimes result in decisions you might call stupid, or genius, or free because they seem unscripted and counter to instincts.
Free will is apparent, anomalous and probably counterproductive. As a corrosive idea that does little but make us miserable, it's better dropped.
I know you want to be an individual, but that's crap sold to you by robber barons. You're a social animal and as individual as the environment allows, seriously, drop concepts that are made of merely apparent percepts.
there are an infinite number of everythings.
Om, all that is all,
and all else is Om,
and all else.
none of us are none or all,
and yet we too, are Om.
no, free will is real, i proved that.
>How many think you've had an actual experience with God ?
If you ask this you don't know what God is. If you ask a question with words you don't know what they mean, there's no point neither to ask it nor to give the answer as you can't understand both, it's the usual empty and meaningless atheistic thoughts.
But for giving you a clue, you're just too dense to experience the subtlety. You can bitch as long as you want about the light, it just makes you dumber and dumber, since this latter is the thing you search in every thought act and word.
i have a problem causing problems,
and a viewpoint that justifies that i should be allowed to do that as a human after meditating to the spirit for months in total bliss of silence, becoming a literal force of fate, allowing myself to follow amazing times of perfect alignment.
but then, i decided to open up to free will, making choices with instinct as well as rational decision making.
for some reason, i know ive won.
i didnt know how easy henosis was.
it was nothing for someone of my caliber.
>Free will is apparent, anomalous and probably counterproductive.
That which can be defined as free will is not free will. Basically, your idea is a shitty approximation of free will rather than actual free will. It exists, but explaining it to someone like you who can't into alternate interpretations would be a magnanimous chore.
It's worth it, though, if you happen to be capable of taking it seriously.