a certain fellow following this thread seems to think that belief in a supreme deity is synonymous with being close minded. lol. being closed minded means affirming your own position on an issue before even listening an examining another person's point of view. #ImJustSaying I like listening to people's views. They either continue to strengthen my conviction on an issue, or force me to re-evaluate my convictions. Thats why I opened this thread. I'm not here to argue.

rickfreeman:
these may be concepts a theist will find as solid proof, but an atheist who has no belief in the spiritual whatsoever will find these as very weak grounds to state that there's a soul. as for ME( i stressed me so no one will think im imposing my beliefs on anyone) i believe that the soul and the body are connected. especially the blood. science has shown that dreaming has to do with neurons and brain stuff and some other technical blah blah. I dont disagree. If the soul is connected to the body, then surely there must be a physical manifestation of its actions. The moment a person dies, the connection between the soul and body is severed. also, the soul naturally yearns for eternal life, i agree with you on that one. butttt the description of eternal life provided by religion and what eternal life actually is differs greatly, just like the description of God and the being Himself. The conscience . . . from my spiritual growth so far, I see our conscience as our soul telling us what is right and what is wrong. Why are we able to know that taking what belongs to another person is wrong, while showing love to another person is right? Why do fundamentally feel the need to take the Law of Karma into our own hands instead of letting nature do it for us? you can testify that if you are slapped on the face, your initial response will be to return the slap, unless you have a matured soul. Why is it that we refer to this physical body as 'my body'? WHO owns the body then?

yes I've come across an article which linked the soul with the body (e.g the electric wire is the body and electricity itself is the soul)

The atheist will or may claim that if dream is prove of the soul's existence then how come most dreams don't come true
Well the answer might be that the soul have not been fully connected with the body (just as poor connection of an electric wire will yield low current or no current at all) ,but these dreams show signs of some abilities(metaphysical) in the human nature (the child possess ability to talk but this ability needs to be nurtured or electricity as innate ability to produce light but when properly connected)

It is also worthy to note that the existence of the soul isn't a scientific fact and can be best proved by personal experience (as you corrected assert)

besides. . . dreams, visions and the likes people claim to experience do not necessarily mean that the event will take place. From what Ive experienced personally, they only serve to show the most likely end result of a person's current actions so that he can change or continue them.




also. . . i think that the soul must be connected with the body for the person to be alive, I disagree with you on that, but thats okay, we're all still learning, I may or may not be wrong. In the event of severe sickness a person might start to hallucinate, which i feel is the soul gradually leaving the body . . . Some dreams might not even come true for slight actions that we're even unaware that could've altered the future. Science has shown us that even the mere killing of a butterfly can alter the future drastically.

BETATRON:
yes I've come across an article which linked the soul with the body (e.g the electric wire is the body and electricity itself is the soul)

The atheist will or may claim that if dream is prove of the soul's existence then how come most dreams don't come true
Well the answer might be that the soul have not been fully connected with the body (just as pure connection of an electric wire will yield low current or no current at all) ,but these dreams show signs of some abilities(metaphysical) in the human nature (the child possess ability to talk but this ability needs to be nurtured or electricity as innate ability to produce light but when properly connected)

It is also worthy to note that the existence of the soul isn't a scientific fact and can be best proved by personal experience (as you corrected assert)

rickfreeman:
besides. . . dreams, visions and the likes people claim to experience do not necessarily mean that the event will take place. From what Ive experienced personally, they only serve to show the most likely end result of a person's current actions so that he can change or continue them.

true

So what do you think about The Law of Karma?

BETATRON:
true

rickfreeman:
if you read further, you will see that i also stated that i cant prove its right, but because of my own personal experiences, I am convinced that they exist. Its a waste of time and energy trying to explain your own personal experiences to someone else. Its one thing to be convinced about something, its another to be able to prove that its right.

As you can't prove these things exist, then you shouldn't be making statements like these

rickfreeman:

If you're a Nigerian you cannot deny the fact that these things exist

No?

rickfreeman:
a certain fellow following this thread seems to think that belief in a supreme deity is synonymous with being close minded. lol. being closed minded means affirming your own position on an issue before even listening an examining another person's point of view. #ImJustSaying I like listening to people's views. They either continue to strengthen my conviction on an issue, or force me to re-evaluate my convictions. Thats why I opened this thread. I'm not here to argue.

Why are you scared of going into a real discussion about your "god" You opened a thread,I supposed you should be brave enough discus about your "supernatural deity". You are trying to avoid certain question obviously. "A certain fellow" what a coward.

BETATRON:
the soul can be proved by it effects in the human,just like electricity and gravity can be proved by there effect on a bulb and a falling body respectively

-Dream is one of the effect of the soul on the humans

-innate yarning for eternal life is another

-the conscience can also be a prove

No

No

No

No

man, this is the same problem with religion!! STOP taking things out of context!!! Like seriously!! the second statement you quoted was me referring to things we see in Nigeria everyday, like people using voodoo for money, people who are able to manipulate nature to their own personal advantage. Or would you say as a Nigerian that voodoo and black magic and the likes are just fairytales? Maybe you haven't personally experienced it then. The first statement u quoted was me talking about experiences of me that strengthened my conviction that I have a soul. PERSONAL experiences that I cant prove to you!

wiegraf:


As you can't prove these things exist, then you shouldn't be making statements like these



No?

rickfreeman:
So what do you think about The Law of Karma?

emmh..to my own understanding I'll say karma is retributive justice (I.e you get what you give) for instance if you don't prepare for an exam your chances of failing the exam becomes high,,or reduction in life span of a drug addict

And karma always catch up with in the sense that if you don't get served here you'll get served in the hereafter that why the day of judgment is also referred to as the day of retribution

This the as far as my ignorance takes me..maybe your opinion can help enlighten me more about it

Supreme deity? How does that differ to religion?

ok you win, I'm a coward, and I'm a scaredy cat. I cannot prove the existence of my God. I used a 'certain fellow' so as to not break rule 2 of Nairaland. And you never posed any real question, you only made a conclusion, possibly intended to make me respond in anger therefore starting an argument with me. That's not what I want. I didnt open this thread to do the typical theists vs atheist argument, no no no no. . . . I opened this thread for us to share our opinions, agree or disagree but still respect each other. And not to merely assert that another person's opinion is wrong. Look at the assumption you made earlier, when anyone who knows me will also know that i detest forms of organised religion. You came here, asserted that I was wrong and then expected it to still be a discussion. What did you expect me to say back? Im not a bloodthirsty religious fanatic who would kill anyone who asserts that Im wrong, though Id rather have them say they disagree. 'Disagree' and 'Wrong' are two different things. Thats not a discussion anymore, thats an argument you wanted. And I didnt give it to you, because I hate arguments. In discussions there are no winners or losers. No rights or wrong. the title of the thread is 'open minded discussions'. Ok? Now do you understand what Ive been trying to say? Sorry for this but you yourself know that your appearance is the first thing assessed before responding to you. That is how humans reason. I might be wrong, but even your username soumds like you enjoy ridiculing people because you dont agree with them. I dont agree withthe Christians either but I still have respect for them and their religion. You clearly dont.

Gayjesus:


Why are you scared of going into a real discussion about your "god" You opened a thread,I supposed you should be brave enough discus about your "supernatural deity". You are trying to avoid certain question obviously. "A certain fellow" what a coward.

rickfreeman:
man, this is the same problem with religion!! STOP taking things out of context!!! Like seriously!! the second statement you quoted was me referring to things we see in Nigeria everyday, like people using voodoo for money, people who are able to manipulate nature to their own personal advantage. Or would you say as a Nigerian that voodoo and black magic and the likes are just fairytales? Maybe you haven't personally experienced it then. The first statement u quoted was me talking about experiences of me that strengthened my conviction that I have a soul. PERSONAL experiences that I cant prove to you!

Nothing is out of context here.

I ask again, how do you determine the validity of a claim? Simple reason being, the exact same reason you think I would reject your belief in souls is the same reason I reject your voodoo; you can't prove they exist......

Yes, juju is 'just fairytales', and blatantly so... How can I experience what isn't real??

Why do you claim with certainty they're real? How do you vet what is valid and what is not?

wiegraf:


No

No

No

No

chuckles

if you read the post to the end, you'll see after that i said 'if you haven't experienced it maybe you should try to if you're seriously seeking for knowledge' or something like that. I assumed he would've, as a Nigerian, but I also gave room for the possibility that he hasnt, which also seems to be the case with you. If he eventually experiences it and comes up with a explanation for it, I'll be glad to listen to it. I can learn something new. But as for me, I have PERSONALLY experienced the use of black magic. Also, if you read further, you'll see that I said that I cant prove my convictions because I experienced them myself and I cant explain it to someone else. Read my analogy of the guitar school. Each person needs to have his own personal experiences. I claimed to be convinced that they are real to ME because of what I have experienced. Have you ever heard about the story of the blind men who touched an elephant and were asked to describe it? One touched the tail and thought it was a very thin animal with hair at the end. Another touched the body and thought it was a giant animal with rough skin. Another touched the tusks and thought it was a strong bodied animal with pointed ends. None of them were wrong, they each spoke based on their own experiences. They are all blind, and in the dark . . . the best they can do is to share what they have learned with each other. ONLY the elephant itself knows how exactly it is.

wiegraf:


Nothing is out of context here.

I ask again, how do you determine the validity of a claim? Simple reason being, the exact same reason you think I would reject your belief in souls is the same reason I reject your voodoo; you can't prove they exist......

Yes, juju is 'just fairytales', and blatantly so... How can I experience what isn't real??

Why do you claim with certainty they're real? How do you vet what is valid and what is not?

the blind men could also choose to laugh at each other, say 'im right, and youre wrong' thats also an option though don't think its a very good one.

wiegraf:


Nothing is out of context here.

I ask again, how do you determine the validity of a claim? Simple reason being, the exact same reason you think I would reject your belief in souls is the same reason I reject your voodoo; you can't prove they exist......

Yes, juju is 'just fairytales', and blatantly so... How can I experience what isn't real??

Why do you claim with certainty they're real? How do you vet what is valid and what is not?

theism and religion are two different things

Judas2013:
Supreme deity? How does that differ to religion?

lol. . . as long as we are all human, we are all ignorant, no one can claim to know it all, we are imperfect beings. my response to you now might be even more ignorant than anything you could've possibly said. Thats why I pray for RECOGNITION to realise my mistakes.


Yeah, I guess I agree with you. . . karma is justice. . . as it is in the physical word, it also translates to intangible things like words and thoughts. If I plant an orange seed, I will get an orange tree. If I strike the tree with an axe, the tree will fall. Action and reaction. Every action has its consequence which is equal and opposite. I do something good to someone, someone will do something good to me. Or it might serve as the equilibrant for a previous bad action.

I also believe in 'judgement' but not as it is explained in religion. Thats a story for another day. I believe in reincarnation. Its a touchy issue many disagree with but I find it to be logical. People complain and ask why God could possibly make their child born with a rare disease. Possibly (I said possibly o, abeg) their child in a previous lifetime was one who made fun of disabled people. His birth as a disabled person enables him to RECOGNISE that it is wrong to make fun of people. He might not necessarily remember his previous lifetime, its not a requirement for him to know that making fun of people is wrong. God established creation with some certain laws in place, like the Law of Karma. He doesn't have to interfere with creation, but he can assist us to recognise our previous wrongs, by whatever means.

BETATRON:
emmh..to my own understanding I'll say karma is retributive justice (I.e you get what you give) for instance if you don't prepare for an exam your chances of failing the exam becomes high,,or reduction in life span of a drug addict

And karma always catch up with in the sense that if you don't get served here you'll get served in the hereafter that why the day of judgment is also referred to as the day of retribution

This the as far as my ignorance takes me..maybe your opinion can help enlighten me more about it

rickfreeman:
if you read the post to the end, you'll see after that i said 'if you haven't experienced it maybe you should try to if you're seriously seeking for knowledge' or something like that. I assumed he would've, as a Nigerian, but I also gave room for the possibility that he hasnt, which also seems to be the case with you. If he eventually experiences it and comes up with a explanation for it, I'll be glad to listen to it. I can learn something new. But as for me, I have PERSONALLY experienced the use of black magic. Also, if you read further, you'll see that I said that I cant prove my convictions because I experienced them myself and I cant explain it to someone else. Read my analogy of the guitar school. Each person needs to have his own personal experiences. I claimed to be convinced that they are real to ME because of what I have experienced. Have you ever heard about the story of the blind men who touched an elephant and were asked to describe it? One touched the tail and thought it was a very thin animal with hair at the end. Another touched the body and thought it was a giant animal with rough skin. Another touched the tusks and thought it was a strong bodied animal with pointed ends. None of them were wrong, they each spoke based on their own experiences. They are all blind, and in the dark . . . the best they can do is to share what they have learned with each other. ONLY the elephant itself knows how exactly it is.

Why do you give so much credence to "personal experience"?

If a blind man claimed he personally touched a mammoths balls while he was holidaying on the moon, would you believe him?

please reread my post. personal experiences are not to be proven to others, but to be shared. To either strengthen or question your beliefs. It seems you read my posts in a hurry to reply me and don't notice these things Ive been saying over and over again. Even science that you hold so dearly, most of what you've learned are from the experiences of these scientists. You didn't perform the experiments yourself. The ones you were able to perform, simple ones like jumping up and then feeling gravitational pull making you fall back to earth strengthened your conviction that their theories are right: they sound logical and you yourself were able to perform the same experiment so you have no doubt that it is valid.

wiegraf:


Why do you give so much credence to "personal experience"?

If a blind man claimed he personally touched a mammoths balls while he was holidaying on the moon, would you believe him?

rickfreeman:
please reread my post. personal experiences are not to be proven to others, but to be shared. To either strengthen or question your beliefs. It seems you read my posts in a hurry to reply me and don't notice these things Ive been saying over and over again. Even science that you hold so dearly, most of what you've learned are from the experiences of these scientists. You didn't perform the experiments yourself. The ones you were able to perform, simple ones like jumping up and then feeling gravitational pull making you fall back to earth strengthened your conviction that their theories are right: they sound logical and you yourself were able to perform the same experiment so you have no doubt that it is valid.

I have not personally performed most of the experiments and doubts always remain to a degree (though often negligible), but the bolded sounds about right. If I had the resources I could verify any of the claims made by science. their results also tend to support each other, building sound, rational frameworks; the theories of evolution, gravity, whatever. Overwhelming amounts of data and phenomena back them up.

Not so much someone claiming a bush tied around his waist stopped a bullet

My point is this - being openminded does not equate to not being critical. It does not mean you should turn your brain off. If you were being fair, you should have a consistent criteria by which you evaluate ideas and claims, not just arbitrarily dismiss some and approve of others because they make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Now, when you put on that thinking cap you'll note that personal experience accounts for virtually f-all. Essentially why in courts physical evidence trumps hearsay and whatnot. Humans are well capable of folly. Natural laws? Not so much.

the scientists you speak of had personal experiences, true, but those experiences can be verified by anyone anywhere in the world, provided they had the means, no? Not so much claims of juju. they are in no way similar as far objecvity and verifiability are concerned, so why do you want us to take such claims seriously?? If one is willing to accept such a nonsensical claim, then one might as well accept that a man walked on water or a donkey spoke to a jew in some desert a few thousand years ago, no?

that said it is a free world. Provided your beliefs are benign why should you really bother with what others think? I just find it weird that you expect us to entertain ideas like juju and reincarnation.

even the greatest scientists like Steven hawking look at things from a philosophical point of view. . . I don't know why it its so hard to look at things concerning the spiritual with the same point of view. . . of course, reading the books like the bible or hearing experiences like juju sound like mere cartoon network tales, because they are reported the same way the authors experienced them without providing any rational explanation for how a God who created a physical world would make His supposed Son violate physical laws, thereby making Him seem imperfect. Its our duty, as humans searching for truth to experience these phenomena ourselves, and continue to seek for explanations as to how they could've been possible. Steven Hawking's belief that somewhere, in another universe parallel to ours, there might be another version of me who is probably a professional IndecentStar (because he claims that there are infinite parallel universes with all possible outcomes existing) sounds as ridiculous as the tale that a man touched a gourd of water and turned it to wine. This doesn't mean that they're both stupid and impossible. . . after all, it was widely believed that the earth was flat until scientists finally reasoned that it couldn't be possibly flat because of a variety of reasons. . . like wise, if a probably uneducated person from the future went to the moon with some companions and started experiencing zero gravity, he would've thought he was flying. . . imagine that person for some reason landed among people from ancient Rome and told their greatest scientists, like Aristotle and Plato. . . how ridiculous would they sound. . . .until years later, Newton understood what gravity was. . . then some more years later. . Neil Armstrong landed on the moon and actually experienced it. If you truly read everything, you'll understand that what in trying to say is that we should not dismiss claims simply because they sound ridiculous to us at the time. If we are truly interested in being enlightened, the best we can do is to strive and search for truth. You talked about feeling 'warm and fuzzy' . . . Thank God your science has finally been able to correlate certain brain patterns in the subconscious region of the brain to making right long term decisions. . . this is what spirituality has called the intuition for so long. You subconsciously make a decision because you just feel that its right. Now science is searching for how this is possible. I hope they find their answer.

wiegraf:


I have not personally performed most of the experiments and doubts always remain to a degree (though often negligible), but the bolded sounds about right. If I had the resources I could verify any of the claims made by science. their results also tend to support each other, building sound, rational frameworks; the theories of evolution, gravity, whatever. Overwhelming amounts of data and phenomena back them up.

Not so much someone claiming a bush tied around his waist stopped a bullet

My point is this - being openminded does not equate to not being critical. It does not mean you should turn your brain off. If you were being fair, you should have a consistent criteria by which you evaluate ideas and claims, not just arbitrarily dismiss some and approve of others because they make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Now, when you put on that thinking cap you'll note that personal experience accounts for virtually f-all. Essentially why in courts physical evidence trumps hearsay and whatnot. Humans are well capable of folly. Natural laws? Not so much.

the scientists you speak of had personal experiences, true, but those experiences can be verified by anyone anywhere in the world, provided they had the means, no? Not so much claims of juju. they are in no way similar as far objecvity and verifiability are concerned, so why do you want us to take such claims seriously?? If one is willing to accept such a nonsensical claim, then one might as well accept that a man walked on water or a donkey spoke to a jew in some desert a few thousand years ago, no?

that said it is a free world. Provided your beliefs are benign why should you really bother with what others think? I just find it weird that you expect us to entertain ideas like juju and reincarnation.

rickfreeman:
even the greatest scientists like Steven hawking look at things from a philosophical point of view. . . I don't know why it its so hard to look at things concerning the spiritual with the same point of view. . . of course, reading the books like the bible or hearing experiences like juju sound like mere cartoon network tales, because they are reported the same way the authors experienced them without providing any rational explanation for how a God who created a physical world would make His supposed Son violate physical laws, thereby making Him seem imperfect. Its our duty, as humans searching for truth to experience these phenomena ourselves, and continue to seek for explanations as to how they could've been possible. Steven Hawking's belief that somewhere, in another universe parallel to ours, there might be another version of me who is probably a professional IndecentStar (because he claims that there are infinite parallel universes with all possible outcomes existing) sounds as ridiculous as the tale that a man touched a gourd of water and turned it to wine. This doesn't mean that they're both stupid and impossible. . . after all, it was widely believed that the earth was flat until scientists finally reasoned that it couldn't be possibly flat because of a variety of reasons. . . like wise, if a probably uneducated person from the future went to the moon with some companions and started experiencing zero gravity, he would've thought he was flying. . . imagine that person for some reason landed among people from ancient Rome and told their greatest scientists, like Aristotle and Plato. . . how ridiculous would they sound. . . .until years later, Newton understood what gravity was. . . then some more years later. . Neil Armstrong landed on the moon and actually experienced it. If you truly read everything, you'll understand that what in trying to say is that we should not dismiss claims simply because they sound ridiculous to us at the time. If we are truly interested in being enlightened, the best we can do is to strive and search for truth. You talked about feeling 'warm and fuzzy' . . . Thank God your science has finally been able to correlate certain brain patterns in the subconscious region of the brain to making right long term decisions. . . this is what spirituality has called the intuition for so long. You subconsciously make a decision because you just feel that its right. Now science is searching for how this is possible. I hope they find their answer.

You seriously misunderstand Hawkins, I don't even know where to begin.

Just note he does consider philosophy as fact, nor does he portray the multiverse as fact, just as a viable hypothesis. And he doesn't do this lightly, there are many good scientific reasons to consider a multiverse (especially quantum weirdness), and that is why he mentions it. Nothing there hinging strictly on personal experience, no. Many other scientists can show you the hard data and phenomena, again, verifiable by anyone with the means, and explain their reasoning for proposing a multiverse.

Sounds ridiculous, multiverses, no? But that is what being openminded is. Accepting the possibilities provided there are justifiable reasons to accept them.

Now, once again, what exactly is the justification for your belief that tying grass around your waist can make you repel bullets? Why do you take such a claim seriously??

Just to think that you'd be saying a different story if Hawking actually decided to visit Africa, see things for himself, and then dedicate his life to try to find a rational explanation for them. Just because you haven't seen it happen doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It'd be different if I just read it in a book. . .. I've actually seen this happen in real life. You keep mentioning the fact that they can 'be repeated over and over again' like as if people who perform these stunts can't perform them over and over again. . . What excuse do you want to give? That they are mere illusions? When we actually loaded the gun ourselves? And the same gun was used on a nearby animal which the impact from the bullet killed instantly? lol. If they are illusions maybe you should come and show me how its done, so I can do the same tricks at birthday parties. . . Its VERY possible that the people performing these stunts know what they're doing but don't understand the mechanisms behind them. You probably would've continued to ignore that the intuition exists until science released data showing how making decisions due to some 'warm and fuzzy' feeling , showing corresponding brain patterns, usually turned out to be right. This is what spirituality has called the intuition for like forever. But because science hadn't understood it yet, people like you chose to dismiss the claims completely. AS FOR ME I DON'T even really care about all these, they're not beneficial to the development of my soul (I know, you don't believe in the soul). . . Like we learn in Buddhism. . . you don't need to acknowledge the existence of God to live in accordance with His Laws. . .my goal in life is to show love to everyone on earth. (NB I never said I was a Buddhist, I detest organised religion). Of course you can ridicule my goal too, after all, you don't believe in the Law of Karma, thereby you probably see no standard for morality/ethics and therefore no reason to show love (I might be wrong about you) . . . even though Newton has stated the physical manifestation of the Law of Karma I.e the third law of mechanics, about equal and opposite reaction. . . .I'm not on earth to justify and prove everything there is to prove. . . Of what gain would that be to me after my departure? Besides, the human race has done more harm to this earth than good when they turn out being wrong . . . NOTICE I'M CHANGING MY TONE not because I want to back down from anything I said earlier, I still stand my ground, but because you refuse to completely read my posts and respond to everything I type, picking only a select few to respond to, like your continuous pressure for me to explain the use of spiritual means to render the effect of bullets useless. My answer to that is that I DONT KNOW HOW, but I've seen it done so I won't dismiss it as impossible. A million years from now a brilliant scientist might come up with a connection between the soul and the body in SCIENTIFIC TERMS. I can't wait that long. All I'm here to do is to help and share love. . . try to do good on earth. It gives me a 'warm and fuzzy' feeling

wiegraf:


You seriously misunderstand Hawkins, I don't even know where to begin.

Just note he does consider philosophy as fact, nor does he portray the multiverse as fact, just as a viable hypothesis. And he doesn't do this lightly, there are many good scientific reasons to consider a multiverse (especially quantum weirdness), and that is why he mentions it. Nothing there hinging strictly on personal experience, no. Many other scientists can show you the hard data and phenomena, again, verifiable by anyone with the means, and explain their reasoning for proposing a multiverse.

Sounds ridiculous, multiverses, no? But that is what being openminded is. Accepting the possibilities provided there are justifiable reasons to accept them.

Now, once again, what exactly is the justification for your belief that tying grass around your waist can make you repel bullets? Why do you take such a claim seriously??

And one more thing. . . I DON'T misunderstand Hawking* . . . I'm not some blind religious follower who jumps to attack every claim. . . I prefer to examine things objectively myself. What I don't know, I don't know. There's no 'hard data' supporting the theory of the multiverse (an infinite number of universes parallel to ours exists with every single imaginable outcome happening on each of them) . . . The only reason why some scientists agree with him is because so far, the theory hasn't broken any physical laws CURRENTLY KNOWN to man. . . just like his latest theory of white holes existing on the other side of black holes. . . I'm not interesting in spending my life proving the existence of my soul, because I don't know how to do that. . . prayers for recognition have shown me coming events sometimes, based on my current actions, with warnings to continue or stop, depending on the outcome. That must sound veryyy ridiculous to you as well, and I won't blame you at all, because I and not you, experienced this.

wiegraf:


You seriously misunderstand Hawkins, I don't even know where to begin.

Just note he does consider philosophy as fact, nor does he portray the multiverse as fact, just as a viable hypothesis. And he doesn't do this lightly, there are many good scientific reasons to consider a multiverse (especially quantum weirdness), and that is why he mentions it. Nothing there hinging strictly on personal experience, no. Many other scientists can show you the hard data and phenomena, again, verifiable by anyone with the means, and explain their reasoning for proposing a multiverse.

Sounds ridiculous, multiverses, no? But that is what being openminded is. Accepting the possibilities provided there are justifiable reasons to accept them.

Now, once again, what exactly is the justification for your belief that tying grass around your waist can make you repel bullets? Why do you take such a claim seriously??

rickfreeman:
Just to think that you'd be saying a different story if Hawking actually decided to visit Africa, see things for himself, and then dedicate his life to try to find a rational explanation for them.

If Hawkins did that, and claimed he were being scientific or factual, I would doubt all his previous discoveries. As would most sane people.

And when you insunuate science is an oyinbo thing, you insult the black man. Abi are you telling me that we are incapable of simple things like reasoning objectively??

rickfreeman:

Just because you haven't seen it happen doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Yes it does. Just as I'm sure there's no toothfairy or santa giving kids presents.

It simply doesn't happen.

rickfreeman:

It'd be different if I just read it in a book. . .. I've actually seen this happen in real life. You keep mentioning the fact that they can 'be repeated over and over again' like as if people who perform these stunts can't perform them over and over again. . . What excuse do you want to give? That they are mere illusions? When we actually loaded the gun ourselves? And the same gun was used on a nearby animal which the impact from the bullet killed instantly? lol. If they are illusions maybe you should come and show me how its done, so I can do the same tricks at birthday parties. . .

I wonder what you'd have said about those Europeans that used to catch bullets with their teeth then claim it was some jazz or whatnot. You'd worship them?

there are many ways such cheap tricks can be performed. Indeed, much better one could be achieved (see my personal favorite, Derren Brown, if that's the sort of stuff that impresses you). You could also be mistaken about what you saw, or you could simply be lying. Bottom line, before I can accept such nonsense, I would factor in human folly. A well documented phenomenon, unlike the laws of physics breaking down because of some spirit powahd grass. Even the finest igbo no get that kind powah.

rickfreeman:

Its VERY possible that the people performing these stunts know what they're doing but don't understand the mechanisms behind them. You probably would've continued to ignore that the intuition exists until science released data showing how making decisions due to some 'warm and fuzzy' feeling , showing corresponding brain patterns, usually turned out to be right. This is what spirituality has called the intuition for like forever. But because science hadn't understood it yet, people like you chose to dismiss the claims completely.

What in the world are you on about? You think science never recognized intuition?

this is like claiming that I reject consciousness because we don't fully know how it works yet. Where from??

And it.is.not.possible!!! Very simple. Unless, of course, the laws of physics don't apply to you or your grass

rickfreeman:

AS FOR ME I DON'T even really care about all these, they're not beneficial to the development of my soul (I know, you don't believe in the soul). . . Like we learn in Buddhism. . . you don't need to acknowledge the existence of God to live in accordance with His Laws. . .my goal in life is to show love to everyone on earth. (NB I never said I was a Buddhist, I detest organised religion).

Careful. At least you don't say you detest followers of organized religion, as there's scant difference between you to be honest. Only difference seems to be you seem to be more cognizant of the folly your beliefs entail.....

rickfreeman:

Of course you can ridicule my goal too, after all, you don't believe in the Law of Karma, thereby you probably see no standard for morality/ethics and therefore no reason to show love (I might be wrong about you) . . . even though Newton has stated the physical manifestation of the Law of Karma I.e the third law of mechanics, about equal and opposite reaction. . . .

How does laws of mechanics = Karma?

rickfreeman:

I'm not on earth to justify and prove everything there is to prove. . . Of what gain would that be to me after my departure? Besides, the human race has done more harm to this earth than good when they turn out being wrong . . . NOTICE I'M CHANGING MY TONE not because I want to back down from anything I said earlier, I still stand my ground, but because you refuse to completely read my posts and respond to everything I type, picking only a select few to respond to, like your continuous pressure for me to explain the use of spiritual means to render the effect of bullets useless. My answer to that is that I DONT KNOW HOW, but I've seen it done so I won't dismiss it as impossible. A million years from now a brilliant scientist might come up with a connection between the soul and the body in SCIENTIFIC TERMS. I can't wait that long. All I'm here to do is to help and share love. . . try to do good on earth. It gives me a 'warm and fuzzy' feeling

Che, what is this soul you're on about? If it can be studied by science, then it's natural. Follows physical laws.....

If these 'souls' follow physical laws, then I suppose there's no jazz involved in their workings, correct?

And are you happy now? I've now addressed your full post, or about as much I can manage. If I were being thorough, I'd end up writing a book.,,

rickfreeman:
And one more thing. . . I DON'T misunderstand Hawking* . . . I'm not some blind religious follower who jumps to attack every claim. . . I prefer to examine things objectively myself. What I don't know, I don't know.

Yes, you are. Lemme repeat myself, as well as fix in an omitted word or two

me:

Just note he does not consider his philosophy as fact. Nor does he portray the multiverse as fact, just as a viable hypothesis. And he doesn't do this lightly, there are many good scientific reasons to consider a multiverse (especially quantum weirdness), and that is why he mentions it. Nothing there hinging strictly on personal experience, no. Many other scientists can show you the hard data and phenomena, again, verifiable by anyone with the means, and explain their reasoning for proposing a multiverse.

rickfreeman:

There's no 'hard data' supporting the theory of the multiverse (an infinite number of universes parallel to ours exists with every single imaginable outcome happening on each of them) . . .

there is hard data supporting the reasoning behind proposing the multiverse, even if not hard data supporting the actual existence of a multiverse. I won't go into a lecture here, no time or money, but again, see quantum weirdness for example. Eg, issues like causality at that level and cat's like shroedingers' being both alive and dead at the same time. Multiverse is a viable way to explain these phenomena. For more abstract support from a different field entirely, see string theory (which is a hypothesis, just to be clear). So the ideas remain scientific, very much so.

rickfreeman:

The only reason why some scientists agree with him is because so far, the theory hasn't broken any physical laws CURRENTLY KNOWN to man. . . just like his latest theory of white holes existing on the other side of black holes. . .

to be clear, multiverse ideas did not originate from him. Anyways, it is not the only reason, but is is of course a good reason to encourage one to at least be openminded and amendable to the idea

See?

Now, do you know just how many physical laws would need to be broken in order to allow for a bush around your waist to stop a bullet?

See?

rickfreeman:

I'm not interesting in spending my life proving the existence of my soul, because I don't know how to do that. . . prayers for recognition have shown me coming events sometimes, based on my current actions, with warnings to continue or stop, depending on the outcome. That must sound veryyy ridiculous to you as well, and I won't blame you at all, because I and not you, experienced this.

Prayer?

Good luck with that....