"God's Beard!"
Member
Qualify "equally".Government-man said:Being an atheist is equally stupid as being a theist.
Qualify "equally".Government-man said:Being an atheist is equally stupid as being a theist.
God's Beard said:Qualify "equally".
Government-man said:Cannot access youtube now. If you cannot even consider things that are not yet proven then you have already failed and you really did enter this conversation with a closed mind. I'm not saying this is true, I'm only saying that I don't know and I will read through whatever new information I get my hands on with an open mind. Most is BS and thats very understandable as I said before. The boy who cried wolf etc. You get hardened and by default deny any new research on the subject. That's what I usually do. I just get tired of people claiming to know the truth, on both sides.
God's Beard said:Qualify "equally".
Government-man said:Meaning that one is equally, or identically, just as, as much, having the same level of, being as stupid as each other.
Liu Kang Baking A Pie said:I hate the talk of relatives and the idea that they watch after you in the afterlife. It's such a "me me me" view of the universe.
If I were dead and able to travel the universe in my ghost form, I'd be way the fuck out in another galaxy seeing some crazy shit, not hanging around watching you eat blocks of cheese while you watch Leno.
Wickerbasket said:So does my dog have a soul too?
Are there going to be spiders in the afterlife? Because I hate spiders.
Government-man said:Meaning that one is equally, or identically, just as, as much, having the same level of, being as stupid as each other.
GrotesqueBeauty said:I believe it's possible. Although consciousness as we understand it is linked to the physical and chemical functions of the brain I don't personally think they alone sum up the phenomenon in its entirety. We measure the part that's measurable as best we know how, but there are dimensions to even our own existence which are immeasurable by our standards. That some aspect of us could persist independent of our bodies doesn't strike me as wholly unreasonable, even if we don't yet have a way of quantifying it. Unfortunately it's such a loaded subject that there's bound to be people on the one hand reading all sorts of specifics into it and on the other dismissing it outright. I guess we'll all find out one day, or not.
Government-man said:Meaning that one is equally, or identically, just as, as much, having the same level of, being as stupid as each other.
"There's an alien communicating with me, there's a dude who looks like a Thai Buddha except hes made entirely of energy and there's no outline to him; he's one thing. And he's telling me not to give into astonishment... Just relax and experience this. I'm like you got to be shitting me."Wii said:
Tobor said:/Reads OP
So...no evidence of an afterlife, whatsoever.
I see plenty of evidence of an Oncologist looking for a book deal, though.
Count Dookkake said:You have a stupid avatar.
Government-man said:It seems as though you are not aware of the fact that our consciousness is very narrow, picking up far from the information that we can measure, not to mention what we can't measure.
If you cannot even consider things that are not yet proven then you have already failed and you really did enter this conversation with a closed mind. I'm not saying this is true, I'm only saying that I don't know and I will read through whatever new information I get my hands on with an open mind. Most is BS and thats very understandable as I said before. The boy who cried wolf etc. You get hardened and by default deny any new research on the subject. That's what I usually do. I just get tired of people claiming to know the truth, on both sides.
Zaptruder said:Having an 'open mind'... or rather been a free thinker is not about letting bullshit pollute your mind.
It is instead about applying a principled method of thinking to allow us to assess and reassess assumptions that have been made culturally implicit. It's about using a methodology of thinking to filter the vast array of information, and to best capture truthiness, while rejecting falsehood.
And it is a method that allows us to reject 'known' assumptions, in favour of better information... but only if it first proves to be indeed, 'better information'.
Government-man said:Meaning that one is equally, or identically, just as, as much, having the same level of, being as stupid as each other.
there's a WHOLE lot about our own bodies we dont understand, let alone getting into the brain, we haven't even scratched the surface of understanding the brain.Emerson said:I don't understand opinions like this. We have absolutely no idea what happens when people die. Everybody makes a lot of theories, and some may have more basis in science than others, but at the end of the day there's a whole lot about this universe that humans don't even come close to understanding yet.
Kinitari said:Without me sounding too snarky, I want to ask, can you elaborate? Why is the disbelief in a God equally as 'stupid' as believing in a God?
This is pretty much my take on the matter (if you'll pardon the expression).Ducarmel said:It may sound kind of hippie like
Since matter and energy cant be destroyed only converted into other forms of matter and energy. I just think when we die whatever matter and energy that makes us beings will just be converted to other forms.
Will we be conscious and independent, or just parts things of millions of different matter/energy as a whole, or something else? I don't know!
thesoapster said:Pretty much. Heightened senses when you're about to die? REALLY?! That's part of his big discovery? Shit. I've glimpsed the afterlife at least five times, then...
this post validates this stupid whole topicOuterWorldVoice said:look at all dat cheese!
haha jay's chin is huge.
oh no he's touchin himself
Well, from what I gather, the general athiest viewpoint is that that is no god because there is no evidence of a god. That really seems like the most logical choice when faced with a lack of evidence. I'm sure if proof of a god suddenly existed, all those deniers would suddenly repent.Government-man said:Because the atheist as well as the theist by definition know that there either is no god or vice versa. Now, as far as I know the concept of a god has neither been proven nor disproved - do you know something I don't? I get that people use the label atheist rather carefree without really reflecting on both the definition of the term and what it really means to know that there is no god, which I think is sad. People who perhaps really are agnostic are just confusing the terms and mistakingly calling themselves an atheist - or, whats worse, they haven't even thought about it.
I'm using god as a metaphor here, you could say that the abrahamitic god has been "disproved", much as you can disprove creatures of fairy tales - but that's just a question of where you'd like to draw the line of what is considered proven.
Government-man said:Because the atheist as well as the theist by definition know that there either is no god or vice versa. Now, as far as I know the concept of a god has neither been proven nor disproved - do you know something I don't? I get that people use the label atheist rather carefree without really reflecting on both the definition of the term and what it really means to know that there is no god, which I think is sad. People who perhaps really are agnostic are just confusing the terms and mistakingly calling themselves an atheist - or, whats worse, they haven't even thought about it.
I'm using god as a metaphor here, you could say that the abrahamitic god has been "disproved", much as you can disprove creatures of fairy tales - but that's just a question of where you'd like to draw the line of what is considered proven.
afterlife is big part of religion.Kurtofan said:The belief in the afterlife has nothing to do with "theism" or "atheism".
You can believe in the afterlife without believing in the existence of gods.
Government-man said:Because the atheist as well as the theist by definition know that there either is no god or vice versa. Now, as far as I know the concept of a god has neither been proven nor disproved - do you know something I don't? I get that people use the label atheist rather carefree without really reflecting on both the definition of the term and what it really means to know that there is no god, which I think is sad. People who perhaps really are agnostic are just confusing the terms and mistakingly calling themselves an atheist - or, whats worse, they haven't even thought about it.
I'm using god as a metaphor here, you could say that the abrahamitic god has been "disproved", much as you can disprove creatures of fairy tales - but that's just a question of where you'd like to draw the line of what is considered proven.
Government-man said:Because the atheist as well as the theist by definition know that there either is no god or vice versa.
Except this phenomenon has decent evidence.Masaki_ said:And here's a video for those who stubbornly defend the legitimacy of any supernatural phenomenon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-h9XntsSEro&feature=channel
That is correct but "atheism" just say that you don't believe in gods.crazy monkey said:afterlife is big part of religion.
:lolKurtofan said:That is correct but "atheism" just say that you don't believe in gods.
You can still believe in ghosts,reincarnation or other forms of afterlife.
ChoklitReign said:Except this phenomenon has decent evidence.
cloud_sleep said:The problem with this kind of evidence is that it typically amounts to hearsay. Who documented these conversations and how did they determine they couldn't have been heard by the patients? These tales remind me of the sort of 'hits' that people who visit mediums refer to, but when they are examined are really just clever guesswork that the believer then tweaks towards the truth during the retelling. As with memories of alien abductions recovered via hypnosis, the problem of both the researcher and subject wanting to find evidence for the phenomena is a real issue with this sort of research.
They need to do properly controlled experiments in this area. I remember a BBC documentary about NDEs in which researchers were placing cards with words/number son them on a shelf close to the ceiling of a room in a hospital ward that treated heart attack victims, the idea being that only someone having a OBE, and floating above their body, would be able to read the cards. No-one did. I would be interested to see a follow-up on that one, however.
Like most people, I'd love for there to be something to this but, alas, have not yet seen anything close to convincing evidence.
Speevy said:Is this not something you know for sure when you die, whether you like it or not?
ChoklitReign said:Except this phenomenon has decent evidence.
I don't see what's funny.crazy monkey said::lol
I did not know atheism is based on beliefs.Kurtofan said:I don't see what's funny.
Care to explain,please?
JodyAnthony said:I am almost certain that there is something after death. i'm not going to try to convince anyone else, though. Let people believe what they want to believe.
I guess the idea of evidence is in the eye of the beholder then. We just need a consensus.Zaptruder said:If you call pseudo science, cherry picking and rewording understood phenomena, and general wish fufillment to be decent evidence... then sure, it has 'decent evidence'.
For the rest of us that look for something a little more concrete and congruent, we're not seeing anything that's too interesting here.
...Okcrazy monkey said:I did not know atheism is based on beliefs.