Faith after Nietzsche

@Frank Apisa,

If someone or something ASSERTS anything, then they/it exist/s.

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

If someone or something ASSERTS anything, then they/it exist/s.

They may not.

You are wrong.

Depends.

If YOU assert something...must I accept that YOU exist?

I say, "NO."

YOU may exist...but YOU may be nothing more than part of an illusion the "I" is having.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

I/You can’t assert “I/You am/are an illusion “ unless I/You exist.

A thought exists.

I/You are not thoughts.

Thoughts only produce emotions.

They in no way explain awareness and consciousness.

“I am,therfore I think” or “I think,therefore I am”

Take your pick.

2 Replies

@Jasper10,

Having Awareness and Control of Consciousness is what separates us from the robotic or automated part of our nature and enables us to be free from just dualistic data (thoughts) and emotions.

0 Replies

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

I/You can’t assert “I/You am/are an illusion “ unless I/You exist.

You do not have to. I certainly can...and I can choose, "YOU MAY BE PART OF AN ILLUSION."

Quote:

A thought exists.

So it does. But because I am reading you making a thought...DOES NOT MEAN YOU EXIST. And, because you read me agreeing with your thought does not mean I exist. YOU DO NOT KNOW IF I EXIST OR NOT...even though you hear me supposedly sharing a thought.

Quote:

I/You are not thoughts.

Agree.

Quote:

Thoughts only produce emotions.

You do this generalization stuff way too often. At some point you probably
will develop the intellectual acuity to stop doing that.

Quote:

They in no way explain awareness and consciousness.

Oh, stop. Please.

Quote:

“I am,therfore I think” or “I think,therefore I am”

Take your pick.

Okay...neither. That is a choice you often miss.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

At least we both agree that thoughts exist, that we are not thoughts and that thoughts transition between the YOU and I and I and YOU.

You could also have chosen "YOU MAY NOT BE PART OF AN ILLSUION" on the SIDE of the fence you sit but you chose not to. Why is that?

Other than thoughts and information coming in from the five senses what else causes emotions then?

Awareness and Consciousness is clearly something that you struggle with.

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

At least we both agree that thoughts exist, that we are not thoughts and that thoughts transition between the YOU and I and I and YOU.

Not sure why you suppose we agree on all that, but since I do not agree with part of it, you are not correct.

Quote:

You could also have chosen "YOU MAY NOT BE PART OF AN ILLSUION" on the SIDE of the fence you sit but you chose not to. Why is that?

Because anyone with a brain realizes that saying "You may be part of an illusion" is also saying, "You may not be part of an illusion." The comment, "You MAY be part of an illusion" does not work if that is not so. Stating the second part of a "may" comment (which I occasionally do)...is a redundancy.

Quote:

Other than thoughts and information coming in from the five senses what else causes emotions then?

I do not know or give a rat's ass. Divert in some other way.

Quote:

Awareness and Consciousness is clearly something that you struggle with.

I do not struggle with it at all. But, in order for you to further the notion that you are more evolved than I, I guess you have to suppose it to be so.

So...go for it. I enjoy the humor.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Which bit of the thought statement assertions don't you agree with me on?

The I and YOU can either be or not be an illusion.

You do struggle with awareness and consciousness. I disagree.

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

Which bit of the thought statement assertions don't you agree with me on?

The part that reads, "(we agree) that we are not thoughts and that thoughts transition between the YOU and I and I and YOU."

Quote:

The I and YOU can either be or not be an illusion.

Your point?

Quote:

You do struggle with awareness and consciousness. I disagree.

Yeah, your bullshit requires that of you. Meh!

In any case, I do not struggle with awareness and consciousness...and have not done so for (what I guess to be) more years than you have been alive. My further guess is that I went through the bullshit your are now struggling with before you were alive.

I guess you to be in your mid-20's...and having a love affair with yourself that you fear, somehow, to be unrequited. It happens, Jasper. More than likely you will eventually mature and see, that even if you are correct that your evolution is more than average, you are going about handling it the wrong way.

Stick with it, Son. You may eventually convince someone other than yourself...if you ever do convince yourself.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

The I and YOU may or may not be an illusion. Both possibilities sit on BOTH sides of the fence.

I don't talk bullshit Frank.

Your logic is failing you.

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

The I and YOU may or may not be an illusion. Both possibilities sit on BOTH sides of the fence.

There is no fence, Jasper. Of course both possibilities exist...because EVERY TIME THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF SOMETHING...there also is a possibility that it isn't. That simply is the way possibilities work.

But at some point you may grow up enough to realize that.

Quote:

I don't talk bullshit Frank.

I would never do that.

Quote:

Your logic is failing you.

If it were, YOU would never realize it. You do not know logic.

Gonna shut this thread down soon, Son.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

You are out of your depth Frank.

You confuse existing with being alive.

You think they are the same.

Runaway Frank.

It changes nothing.

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

You are out of your depth Frank.

Nice try, Son...but a fail. YOU should stick to the kiddy pool.

Quote:

You confuse existing with being alive.

I am not confusing anything. Your amateurish attempts to sell yourself as significantly evolved are addling your mind.

Quote:

You think they are the same.

You have no idea of what I think. But it is fun watching you pretend to know.

Quote:

Runaway Frank.

I do not run away, Jasper. I suspect you eventually will.

Quote:

It changes nothing.

You are a master of nonsense comments, I'll give you that.

Anyway, back to the thread topic:

I doubt Nietzsche influenced many people regarding religion. The religious are just as religious after reading him...and the non-religious just as non-religious.

I have read him. He gets a bit convoluted...so following his reasoning is difficult. And since I am essentially agnostic on the question of gods, very little anyone says to persuade in either direction impacts on me.
[/quote]

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Let’s get back to the logic of atheism.

Atheistic logic starts with the guess that ABSOLUTES do not exist and that good and bad are the same.This is based upon their belief systems.

If a God exists then good and bad could be different.Let’s not fool ourselves.

I assert that nature is fair and allows for all possibilities.

It is impossible to cancel out magnetic force interactions as atheistic science claims. You can only balance them.To do this you require an N and S force on both sides of the fence.

This FACT I maintain completely changes the atheistic scientific and psychological model which is incorrect.

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

Let’s get back to the logic of atheism.

Okay, give it a shot.

Quote:

Atheistic logic starts with the guess that ABSOLUTES do not exist and that good and bad are the same.This is based upon their belief systems.

'I am not an atheist, but I think are full of soup on this. I've never heard an atheist mention this, let alone offer it as a basic of their atheism. So...this is contrived...and merely offered by you in a gratuitous way.

Quote:

If a God exists then good and bad could be different.Let’s not fool ourselves.

Good and bad could be different whether a god exists or not. Definitions of "good" and "bad" are the problem.

Quote:

I assert that nature is fair and allows for all possibilities.

Anything that is not established as impossible...IS POSSIBLE. I have no idea of what you mean by "nature is fair."

Quote:

It is impossible to cancel out magnetic force interactions as atheistic science claims.

What in the hell are you babbling about???

Why make this **** up? What is your purpose?

Quote:

You can only balance them.To do this you require an N and S force on both sides of the fence.

Once again: What in the hell are you babbling about???

Why make this **** up? What is your purpose?

Quote:

This FACT I maintain completely changes the atheistic scientific and psychological model which is incorrect.

And one more time:

What in the hell are you babbling about???

Why make this **** up? What is your purpose?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

I don’t make anything up Frank.

All sciences are interconnected.

If good and bad could be different then allow for it in science and philosophy as a starting point even if you don’t know what that difference is.

Don’t just assume they are the same as a starting point.

2 Replies

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

"All sciences are interconnected."

An example of all sciences being connected, maybe?

If good and bad could be different then allow for it in science and philosophy as a starting point even if you don’t know what that difference is.

"Don’t just assume they are the same as a starting point."

If good and bad are x and y on a continuum, then any position in the middle is a starting point in both directions.

"I don't make anything up, Frank."

Don't be modest. You make tons of crap up. This is a symptom of your own personal Maya. It doesn't bother me, but it should be bothering you.

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

I don’t make things up bobsal.

How do you cancel out the 4 off magnetic force interactions in nature bobsal? NN,NS,SN,SS Forget the nonsense maths.We have magnetic forces in nature that you simply cannot cancel out.

I mean in practice….….how do you cancel them out? You can’t.All you can do is balance them.This is a fact bobsal. You need to alternate the N and S force between 2 magnets in order to get a vibratory balance.

Nature does this by SPINNING and TILTING all the electromagnets in the cosmos and everything is an electromagnet in the cosmos.

The above principles are related across the sciences.

I do not make things up.

Atheistic science and philosophy makes things up.

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

And the full logics of NN,NS,SN,SS or 0,0…0,1..1,0..1,1 or -/-..-/+..+/-..+/+ applies across the sciences and the N and S forces are DIFFERENT or all 4 off interactions would be identical.Let’s just ASUME that good is good and bad is bad as absolutes and not ASSUME that good is bad bad is good as absolutes.

Why not? Atheistic science can’t definitively challenge it and it has absolutely zero proof that good is bad and bad is good as an absolute.

1 Reply

At least there were 10×10×10×10 philosophers, physicists, mathematicians, poets, and even unknown ordinary people believed that everything in this cosmos is INTERCONNECTED or say sciences are all INTERCONNECTED hundreds of years ago. Piggy guesses. But up to this day, nobody can DESCRIBE it in one physics theory.
The key is how to do it and who can do it.

http://p1.qhimgs4.com/t011edf60814ee31acc.gif

Just “Blah blah, toggle, plus, minus, blah blah, gravity magnetism” is useless at all in science.

0 Replies

Faith after Nietzsche

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know