|
Post by OldSamVimes on Aug 2, 2021 20:20:10 GMT
Prove you're worth the time. Wait, you're the one that asked me about "spiritual experience" first. What happened to that? Define "spiritual experience" first and I'll answer your question. I don't think a big-brained psychology expert like you should waste time with a stupid and dishonest non-Materialist like me. Embrace your faith in Materialism.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Aug 2, 2021 20:22:23 GMT
I deeply care about your opinion of me bro. Not really, if you did you probably wouldn't be so cripplingly stupid. I guess I needed to stipulate I was being sarcastic. ...how cripplingly stupid of me.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Aug 2, 2021 20:22:54 GMT
Wait, you're the one that asked me about "spiritual experience" first. What happened to that? Define "spiritual experience" first and I'll answer your question. I don't think a big-brained psychology expert like you should waste time with a stupid and dishonest non-Materialist like me. Embrace your faith in Materialism. "I don't think a big-brained psychology expert like you should waste time with a stupid and dishonest non-Materialist like me." I don't think it's a waste of time at all, I think it's very important to argue against anti-intellectualism and ignorance all the time, it makes the world a better place. Now define "spiritual experience" and I'll answer your question.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Aug 2, 2021 20:23:40 GMT
Not really, if you did you probably wouldn't be so cripplingly stupid. I guess I needed to stipulate I was being sarcastic. ...how cripplingly stupid of me. I know you were being sarcastic, doesn't invalidate what I said.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Aug 2, 2021 20:46:36 GMT
I don't think a big-brained psychology expert like you should waste time with a stupid and dishonest non-Materialist like me. Embrace your faith in Materialism. "I don't think a big-brained psychology expert like you should waste time with a stupid and dishonest non-Materialist like me." I don't think it's a waste of time at all, I think it's very important to argue against anti-intellectualism and ignorance all the time, it makes the world a better place. Now define "spiritual experience" and I'll answer your question. 'Spiritual experience' is subjective. Something like 'An experience that makes a person question the theory that nothing exists except matter and it's modifications'. An experience that makes a person believe that spirit exists as separate from matter, or that there is more to existence than what we can perceive with our senses or instruments. Experiences with spirit worlds in aboriginal cultures, experiences with reincarnation, out of body experiences, near death experiences, DMT realm experiences and psychedelics in general. There is no culture that had no spiritual beliefs, all the way to be beginning of recorded history. To discount all spiritual experience is extremely narrow-minded and IMO is a declaration of narcissism.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 2, 2021 21:30:52 GMT
"I don't think a big-brained psychology expert like you should waste time with a stupid and dishonest non-Materialist like me." I don't think it's a waste of time at all, I think it's very important to argue against anti-intellectualism and ignorance all the time, it makes the world a better place. Now define "spiritual experience" and I'll answer your question. 'Spiritual experience' is subjective. Something like 'An experience that makes a person question the theory that nothing exists except matter and it's modifications'. An experience that makes a person believe that spirit exists as separate from matter, or that there is more to existence than what we can perceive with our senses or instruments. Experiences with spirit worlds in aboriginal cultures, experiences with reincarnation, out of body experiences, near death experiences, DMT realm experiences and psychedelics in general. There is no culture that had no spiritual beliefs, all the way to be beginning of recorded history. To discount all spiritual experience is extremely narrow-minded and IMO is a declaration of narcissism. This whole exchange is hilarious. AS usual you have
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Aug 2, 2021 21:32:23 GMT
'Spiritual experience' is subjective. Something like 'An experience that makes a person question the theory that nothing exists except matter and it's modifications'. An experience that makes a person believe that spirit exists as separate from matter, or that there is more to existence than what we can perceive with our senses or instruments. Experiences with spirit worlds in aboriginal cultures, experiences with reincarnation, out of body experiences, near death experiences, DMT realm experiences and psychedelics in general. There is no culture that had no spiritual beliefs, all the way to be beginning of recorded history. To discount all spiritual experience is extremely narrow-minded and IMO is a declaration of narcissism. This whole exchange is hilarious. AS usual you have Oh look, it's the airhead that thinks all men are rapists by default and Trump is going to destroy the world.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Aug 2, 2021 23:58:55 GMT
"I don't think a big-brained psychology expert like you should waste time with a stupid and dishonest non-Materialist like me." I don't think it's a waste of time at all, I think it's very important to argue against anti-intellectualism and ignorance all the time, it makes the world a better place. Now define "spiritual experience" and I'll answer your question. 'Spiritual experience' is subjective. Something like 'An experience that makes a person question the theory that nothing exists except matter and it's modifications'. An experience that makes a person believe that spirit exists as separate from matter, or that there is more to existence than what we can perceive with our senses or instruments. Experiences with spirit worlds in aboriginal cultures, experiences with reincarnation, out of body experiences, near death experiences, DMT realm experiences and psychedelics in general. There is no culture that had no spiritual beliefs, all the way to be beginning of recorded history. To discount all spiritual experience is extremely narrow-minded and IMO is a declaration of narcissism. "'Spiritual experience' is subjective." I know, that's why I asked for your definition of it "Something like 'An experience that makes a person question the theory that nothing exists except matter and it's modifications'." That's fine to have experiences on would describe as "spiritual" (if I were on hallucenegenics I possibly would as well) however that doesn't automatically add validity to the idea that there is something besides matter (particuarly since that's just anecdotal and has never been proven empirically) "An experience that makes a person believe that spirit exists as separate from matter, or that there is more to existence than what we can perceive with our senses or instruments." Again, while many people often perceive experiences such as this, that doesn't really validate the existence of spirits/supernatural/etc (again that's anecdotal, not empirical). If someone takes hallucengenics and sees a secret leprechaun realm, that doesn't really add validity to their claim now does it? "Experiences with spirit worlds in aboriginal cultures, experiences with reincarnation, out of body experiences, near death experiences, DMT realm experiences and psychedelics in general. There is no culture that had no spiritual beliefs, all the way to be beginning of recorded history." That's only because scientific/naturalistic explanation for the world hadn't been discovered yet, so man had to find other, supernatural explanation (man used to think the sun was a God for instance and metal illnesses were caused by demons). "To discount all spiritual experience is extremely narrow-minded and IMO is a declaration of narcissism." Discount in what way? I'm sure theses experience were great inpsiration for folklore tales, art, books, movies, songs, etc, I don't discount them in that sense. Discount them in the sense that they validate the supernatural? I don't see how that's "narcistic", again many used to be believe in a lot of riddicuolus things (the sun was a god, schizophrenia was caused by demons, Salem witch trials). If something hasn't been been proven in any empirical/sceintific/objective way then I don't seen how it's "narrowminded" to write it off.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Aug 3, 2021 0:02:18 GMT
This whole exchange is hilarious. AS usual you have Oh look, it's the airhead that thinks all men are rapists by default and Trump is going to destroy the world. Keep going...this one is classic "Red herrings also pop up in rhetoric and argumentation. A red herring fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone presents a seemingly important but actually irrelevant piece of information, in order to distract from the main topic being discussed."
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Aug 20, 2021 23:01:34 GMT
possibly with their brains/selves fighting off the temptation to believe in superstitions or taking things as signs all around them as they are encountered throughout their daily lives? Or maybe their brains are wired to immediately write these things off as coincidences and bad habits that need to be shaken? Another but more neutral way of putting this would be to ask whether atheists are open minded. In my own case at least I would like to think yes, in that I know exactly what it would take to persuade me that God exists which I deem 'red line events' (limbs growing back at Lourdes for instance). In contrast I have always found believers hard pushed to specify what, if anything, would ever convince them that their preferred deity does not exist, at least until if and when they ever lose their faith, when in retrospect the reasons can be readily identified.
|
|