What if no religions are correct, but there still is a God?

@jerlands,

jerlands wrote:

Quote:
If that were true then blind people are what 1/5th dead? Or people who are both blind and deaf are 2/5ths dead? That is silly.

In ancient egypt they used to blind some musicians so they would better develop their other senses (at least this is my recollection.)

No.. if you had no senses then you'd technically be dead. Is there's such a thing as partially dead or a percentage dead? Well... if a person is 75 years old and life expectancy is 85 is the person 88% dead? I don't think so.

Since we are on the subject of senses. Let's just assume for a moment that you could exist without any of the 5 senses from birth. You are born without the ability to see, hear, taste, feel touch or smells.

You would never develop anything outside of you ever. You wouldn't have a concept of food, of cars, of people or even of self. To have a reference for self you need a reference of other. You also would never develop a concept of god. Nothing would exist because it is by our senses that we have exposure to something. To suggest that you would magically know what god is without any reference is silly. You wouldn't even have a reference for yourself so why would you develop a reference for a god? You wouldn't. You are taught what god is. Yet you have no reference for it. This is why people often ask what is god. 9 trillion people have 9 trillion different explanations. because it's so abstract and vague it can be anything and nothing.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Quote:

Since we are on the subject of senses. Let's just assume for a moment that you could exist without any of the 5 senses from birth. You are born without the ability to see, hear, taste, feel touch or smells.

There are more than 5 senses.. if we have no perception of reality, in other words, our environment, then we would not be breathing.

0 Replies

@jerlands,

jerlands wrote:

Quote:
"What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other word would smell as sweet;"

Also, the context that quote is in is to accept or reject something because of it's association.

That's what you seemed to be doing by substituting the word "dung" for "light." "Dung" would still have the meanings that the word "light" has in addition to the ones it already has (cf. "screw").

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

That's what you seemed to be doing by substituting the word "dung" for "light." "Dung" would still have the meanings that the word "light" has in addition to the ones it already has (cf. "screw").

No.. I'm suggesting words have an effect on the mind outside of the associations we give words. This opinion of mine stems from background I have in other studies where words are used to perform 'magic' though I have never witnessed the 'magic' only have tales of it. Essentially words are containers and if constructed properly the word has the power to carry that which is being called.

1 Reply

@jerlands,

M'hm.

0 Replies

I'm surprised the topic of 'sensory deprivation chambers' didn't come up.

They are not 100% but even getting close to that, it's been shown that 'mind' not only does not go away with senses, but can expand and arrive at thoughts and conclusions it was unable to do before deprivation.

Senses do not make the person. Sometimes they inhibit the person.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

I'm surprised the topic of 'sensory deprivation chambers' didn't come up.

That sounds like a Grateful Dead Concert

The development of autism might be linked to sensory deprivation (through physical or emotional trauma.)

1 Reply

@jerlands,

A sensory deprivation chamber is the virtual opposite of a Grateful Dead concert.
Try Googling it.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

Try Googling it.

You can deprive in a number of ways. You can deprive the body of nutrition by limiting your diet to big macs... no matter how many you eat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Size_Me

1 Reply

@jerlands,

True, true, but irrelevant.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

True, true, but irrelevant.

I don't know... I've always thought the body is analogous to the mind.

1 Reply

@jerlands,

The whole idea behind sensory deprivation experience is to reveal that 'mind' (or consciousness or whatever u want to call it) remains after the senses are absent. Or more accurately, you are MORE aware of mind when you aren't distracted by sensory inputs.

But if you consider yourself just a hundred+ pounds of hamburger - OK

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

The whole idea behind sensory deprivation experience is to reveal that 'mind' (or consciousness or whatever u want to call it) remains after the senses are absent.

I understand the experiment but you can see it's limitations because the body and senses are intact, just 'somewhat' removed from a normal environment.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Water Memory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8VyUsVOic0&t=2412s

1 Reply

@jerlands,

jerlands wrote:

Water Memory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8VyUsVOic0&t=2412s

water memory, not the first time I've heard of it. But it's 100% pure male cow feces.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Quote:

water memory, not the first time I've heard of it. But it's 100% pure male cow feces.

So you watched the video and that was your conclusion?

2 Replies

@jerlands,

jerlands wrote:

Quote:
water memory, not the first time I've heard of it. But it's 100% pure male cow feces.

So you watched the video and that was your conclusion?

Yeah it's no different than homeopathy. It's pure silliness.

2 Replies

@Krumple,

Quote:

Yeah it's no different than homeopathy. It's pure silliness

Why surgical procedures for heart disease, like stents, are potentially ineffective.
https://youtu.be/AeZih12H3JM

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Quote:

Hear no evil, Speak no evil, See no evil

We can shut all these doors but then where would we be?

1 Reply

@jerlands,

jerlands wrote:

Quote:
water memory, not the first time I've heard of it. But it's 100% pure male cow feces.

So you watched the video and that was your conclusion?

There are aspects of the "experiment" that are sloppy.

Here is an example. You start with a dense concentrate of DNA right? Just how dense the DNA that is started with can have "contaminates".

So you go through their "magic" number of dilutions right? This is pure assumption that after this "magic" number of dilutions there "shouldn't" be any DNA molecules left. This is pure speculation. It is unknown weather there ARE or ARE NOT molecules. It is ASSUMED there are none.

This is called a fumble in logic. You are starting from the position that something is true, when it could be false.

Where are the tests to confirm no actual DNA molecules remain in the heavily diluted samples?

THIS IS THE ONLY way you can confirm if the experiment actually has a result. To ASSUME it has no remaining molecules causes the result to be tainted with bias. You don't have any result.

In other words it is pure male cow feces.

Do you want to know why he is willing to risk his "credibility" as a scientist?

Because finding the AIDs virus was a no brainier. The aids virus is huge as far as viruses go. It's not like fining a needle in a haystack, but instead its like finding a log in a haystack.

All it took was to have a patient that was exhibiting "unhealthy" symptoms give their blood sample. Analyzing the blood sample would narrow it down if anything "foreign" was in the sample. If there is anything within the blood sample that shouldn't be there it will be discovered. Since the HIV virus is extremely large it was easily found.

This wasn't a difficult task. It would be like going to a wrecking yard to find a car. You couldn't fail at this task.

That is why he is willing to risk his reputation. Because he has NO reputation.

0 Replies

What if no religions are correct, but there still is a God?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know