Dream17:


V.S



Oh dear... it's not going very well for you, is it?

You talk too much without thinking
You sent back from work your car to your house through your driver
1. Can your beloved dog assume that you are in the vehicle and start wagging it's tail and jumping up and down in anticipation?
If the answer is yes, then your dog has a belief you are in the car (until proved wrong)


2. Does your beloved dog have ANY notion of the existence of any kind of Deity? Do you even think this is a possibility?



Oh dear... it's not going very well for you, is it?

Dream17:


It was an obvious contradiction you made, and not your first. Now lets recap using bullet points since you like them:

• Atheism is defined as the lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities, it’s in any dictionary.

• Lacking theistic belief can involve choices, but it also need not.

Let's put your definition to test:
Animals lack or have absence of belief in ANY Deity! Does this make animas Atheists?

My claim:
It takes cognitive abilities required for abstract thinking for one to have a belief system such as atheism or theism.

Dream17:

• What objective evidence can you demonstrate for your claim that deities, demons and angels exist?

There is no objective evidence that will satisfy you for Christians never defined their God as physical but a spirit.
For your Comprehension perhaps you should answer the question below
You are a 2D observer in your 2D space, what evidence do you think your senses can objectively fathom 3D objects in their 3D space?

Dream17:

Please take note: Point #3 is a question, and I asked this after you made your initial claim, and before you asked me any questions, so if you refuse to answer this honestly then you can not expect me to reciprocate.

Your question has been answered.

If as a 2D observer in your 2D space which is inside a 3D space you cannot objectively fathom things in 3D space, would that be a conclusive proof that both 3D objects and 3D space do not exist?

LordReed:


Sorry about what?

I have given my views. Answer the question so we further the discussion.

It's your turn to speak (except you don't have any view)! I won't repeat myself again.

I don't know a hoot about your views about the subject of the philosophy of Spatial Dimensions and the spiritual, oblige me.

LordReed:


So if I choose not to have beer In my house I don't lack beer in my house?

If you choose to lack cognitive sense, how does it concern me?

What you have as Atheist is NOT a lack of Belief, but a personal choice based on reason to REJECT a proposed thing, fact, idea or issue in relation to deities.

1. We you compelled by others to be an Atheist?
2. Do you have reasons you reject theism and their deities?
3. How is the notion below faulty? :
We Choose/Take/Hold a position of BELIEF when whenever have a REASONABLE but INCOMPLETE knowledge of a position or thing to hold a position of HIGH or LOW Probability

TenQ:

It's your turn to speak (except you don't have any view)! I won't repeat myself again.

I don't know a hoot about your views about the subject of the philosophy of Spatial Dimensions and the spiritual, oblige me.

Reread my posts, they aren't that many, my view is all over them.

I asked you for the principles of philosophy of Spatial Dimensions so we can discuss it, you are yet to supply that.

TenQ:

If you choose to lack cognitive sense, how does it concern me?

What you have as Atheist is NOT a lack of Belief, but a personal choice based on reason to REJECT a proposed thing, fact, idea or issue in relation to deities.

1. We you compelled by others to be an Atheist?
2. Do you have reasons you reject theism and their deities?
3. How is the notion below faulty? :
We Choose/Take/Hold a position of BELIEF when whenever have a REASONABLE but INCOMPLETE knowledge of a position or thing to hold a position of HIGH or LOW Probability

If I choose not to have cognitive sense do I lack cognitive sense? LoLz.

Dream17:


Lol, I wonder why you keep insisting that I'm emotional. I'm curious as to what should be making me emotional in this conversation? This is the second time you've repeated this assertion, and given how you've approached this discussion so far, it's starting to seem more likely that you are projecting your own feelings on to me rather than providing an objective assessment. You obviously have very strong opinions about how certain words should/should not be used - strong arbitrary opinions that contradict the dictionary definitions at that. That's good on you. Any expectation, however, that I (or others) will go along with your opinions on those usages is not binding. You're certainly welcome to be as adamant about it as you like. That just doesn't seem to be working though. Out of curiosity, how much longer do you plan to keep it up?

Keep your words direct to the point!
When a dictionary defines a word in deliberate error to please a group such as the LGBTQ and Atheists, I refuse to follow such unless it agrees with common sense.
Eg.
What/Who is a Woman?
Me: An adult Biological Female
Some stupid Dictionaries: 'an adult who lives and identifies as a female even though they have been born as a different sex. '
https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/us/man-and-woman-now-have-different-definitions-in-cambridge-dictionary/articleshow/96207546

Dream17:

As I have asked you, repeatedly, to demonstrate any objective evidence for any gods. Until you do me the courtesy of even acknowledging my question, I am disinclined to answer cryptic and irrelevant questions you are firing at me, especially since it is in response to my question, but without providing any answer.

Even though I've answered you several times: the question is silly!
It's like asking repeatedly: show me a square circle?

There exist no PHYSICAL test, equipment or Objective test to force the spiritual into the physical. Every evidence of the spiritual is SUBJECTIVE to the individual persons Experience!

Dream17:

I asked you a question, you ignored it and refused to respond. Then you asked one of me, that has no relevance. That is not debating in good faith. You seem to have the religious apologist's penchant for reeling off unevidenced claims and then ignoring questions that examine those claims.

What a spectacularly unintelligent claim. You have claimed a deity exists, also angels and demons, so the burden of proof for your claims is entirely yours.

There are always two ways to prove any point:

+The claimant can make a proof
+The disclaimer can also make his own proof.

Since I can't get you a physical proof, perhaps you can.

The ball is in your court: Give me your objective proof that the spiritual realm and deities do NOT exist?

Dream17:

I have made no such claim. This is yet another rather clumsy straw man fallacy.

My bad I said:
I didn't create anything, therefore I ask you for evidence of your claim that NOTHING created everything?

Can you please articulate and present your exact claim with respect to the above subject?

Dream17:

Another straw man, I have never claimed to lack belief in anything, only to lack belief in any deity or deities.

Yawn. Once more then, they are not mutually exclusive. Seriously, how long do you intend to keep up with this farce?

What exactly did I say?
I said:

By the definition of Belief:
It takes a total lack of opinion, knowledge and comprehension of a fact, idea or issue for a person to successfully lack a belief in anything.

You should know that this is a generic definition; just replace anything with deities in my claim. LOL!

Let me ask you some basic questions (even though I've answered them for you previously)
1. Are these statements below true or false?
a. We cannot BELIEVE in whatever have a Total KNOWLEDGE of.
b. We cannot DISBELIEVE in whatever have a Total KNOWLEDGE of.

2. If they are both true, is BELIEF and DISBELIEF functions of taking a position from Incomplete Knowledge?







On a lighter note:
To quote the other person properly,
instead of typing
[quote.]
This is your quotation
[/quote.]


You'ld copy and paste the header of the other person's writeup as
[quote. .author=TenQ p.ost=123409333]
This is your real quotation
[/quote.]

LordReed:


Reread my posts, they aren't that many, my view is all over them.

I asked you for the principles of philosophy of Spatial Dimensions so we can discuss it, you are yet to supply that.

Back to square One!

Let me oblige you if this is what is Keeping you from clearly presenting your own views.
The subject of discussion (The Philosophy of Spatial Dimensions and the Spiritual) is discussed as an aspect of Metaphysics, Logic and with a tiny dose of Science.
The principles of discussion had been a mixture of Thought Experiments, Rationality and Conceptual Analysis!

I am not an "academic philosopher" therefore there exist no way I would put my thoughts in the fancy academic format. Are there other principles I could have used? I don't know. Others can fill in the gap as it is not a definitive complete assembly of knowledge on the theme.


Now that I have obliged you, it now your turn to fill this place with your knowledge and opinion!

LordReed:


If I choose not to have cognitive sense do I lack cognitive sense? LoLz.

It means you are out of your mind or insane!

KnownUnknown:


Or



Which one do y’all prefer? They both have the same amount of evidence.

I understand your feeling:
We can interact with Leprechaun and Unicorn only when They come down to our Level from the Ultimo level. Since They are higher than us, this is reasonable that in some cases we can interact with L&U on our physical level.

Example: A Person in 4D space can easily interact with observer's in 3D space who will see this person in 3D form

At the same time as humans, we know that L&U made us also as essential beings, in that respect, we can interact with Them as "an Essence"

Is this a statement of TRUTH from your own experience or it is a statement of UNTRUTH?


This is the difference!

Retracted

TenQ:

1. Is it reasonable to conclude unequivocally that higher dimensions than 3D do NOT exist in the Universe?
2. What kind of experiments would you advise scientists in the 2D world conduct to prove the existence of the 3D space?
3. Let's assume that by some Stroke of massive intelligence, scientists in the 2D space have perfect scientific knowledge of their space, would this knowledge be adequate in the 3D space?
4. We know that a person in a higher dimension can interact with those in the lower dimensions: is the converse possible?[/i]

When scientists understand consciousness, energy, and waves deeply, we'll get concrete answers to these questions. The answers to these problems -- just like the solutions to all other challenges humanity faces -- lie in science, not religion.

In modern times, religion has no usefulness and place in the modern world.

TenQ:
1. Is it reasonable to conclude unequivocally that higher dimensions than 3D do NOT exist in the Universe?

Now to the questions you asked: Higher dimensions other than 3D exist. Anyone with basic knowledge of Physics would certainly understand the spatiotemporal nature of reality, i.e. the 4D nature of our world. Minkowski Space in Advanced Physics/Math treats this subject in detail.

The problem here isn't whether higher dimensions of reality exist or not. The issue lies in the limited perception of humans.

Due to the limitations of the brain and our senses, humans can only grasp and make sense of things in 3D and 4D. We can travel forward and backward spatially in 3D (in space) but can't move forward and backward temporally (in time).

So, 4D dimensions exist without any doubt.

Higher dimensions also exist. Even though the current scientific understanding of these dimensions is limited, we'd understand them deeply in the future. Already, significant progress has been made in higher-dimensional mathematics such as quaternions (extending the complex numbers), octonions (extending quaternions), and sedenions (extending octonions).

As a physicist, I regard reality as existing in multiple bases and frequencies, echoing the notion of philosophers like Hypatia and Plato. In the spaces around you (just like the rest of us), there are multiple realms, with each existing independently of the other and separated by a barrier.

When the consciousness of a person is altered (such as during sleep paralysis, deep meditation, NDE/OOBE, lucid dreams and other hypnagogic phases/states, or death), they can experience other realms of existence.

Reality can be scaled at multiple levels or dimensions. We've microscopic and macroscopic scales (as shown in the attached photo below). I prefer to call the microscopic and macroscopic scales the outer universe, which is the physical world. Below the microscopic levels, or specifically below the Planck scale (within 10^-35m orders of magnitude), are nonmaterial realms, which are purely fields of consciousness and energy.

That's the inner universe or inner worlds. These are worlds of thoughts, ideas, feelings, fears, and other emotions.

It is this inner universe you religious people call the spiritual realm.

Consciousness and energy is all that exists -- everything else is a product of the brain's interpretations.

TenQ:
2. What kind of experiments would you advise scientists in the 2D world conduct to prove the existence of the 3D space?

The answer lies in Mathematics and broadening of scope. Whether higher dimensions exist or not is a problem of perception.

TenQ:
3. Let's assume that by some Stroke of massive intelligence, scientists in the 2D space have perfect scientific knowledge of their space, would this knowledge be adequate in the 3D space?

Your question is poorly framed. There's nothing like having perfect scientific knowledge in science. No scientific knowledge is perfect or absolute.

TenQ:
4. We know that a person in a higher dimension can interact with those in the lower dimensions: is the converse possible?[/i]

Yes. Humans in lower dimensions interact with higher dimensions during lucid dreams, deep meditations, NDEs, and astral travels.

Religious texts, philosophies such as Ifa (in Yoruba), languages, and some technological inventions are some products of these interactions.

When a person's consciousness is altered either naturally via lucid dreams and meditations or artificially via psychoactive substances such as entheogens and psychedelics, they can interact with higher dimensions.

The science underlying this is resonance, superposition, and coherence (I might shed more light on this later), and some humans have the gift of seeing into higher dimensions naturally. Ifa, one of the ancestors of Yorubas, was one of such people.

TenQ:

It means you are out of your mind or insane!

And an insane person lacks sanity yes? LoLz.

TenQ:

Keep your words direct to the point!
When a dictionary defines a word in deliberate error to please a group such as the LGBTQ and Atheists,

You are becoming a rather atrocious liar in this discussion. This is not how dictionaries are complied, although this ludicrous conspiracy theory of yours does rather explain a lot. The dictionary definition of atheism is what most people understand the word to mean. That is how dictionaries are compiled, and my own atheism is the lack of absence of belief in any deity or deities. Leaving that aside, you have yet to explain how arriving at atheism through choice and reason negates it being a lack or absence of belief in any deity, the definition of the word disbelief supports this as well, and is synonymous with atheism, you know what a synonym is right?

What/Who is a Woman?
Me: An adult Biological Female
Some stupid Dictionaries: 'an adult who lives and identifies as a female even though they have been born as a different sex. '

Words can and do change their meaning over time, dictionaries are compiled based on what most people consider a word to mean. They are not influenced by people who sulk that those words don't reflect their own subjective personal beliefs.

Even though I've answered you several times...

You have not answered me candidly at all. Instead, you have evaded the question with a dishonest straw man, implying that objective evidence exists but that I would not accept it, and without presenting anything.

... the question is silly! It's like asking repeatedly: show me a square circle?

You are saying rubbish. We know objective evidence is possible, it exists for all manner of facts, you have simply used a false equivalence fallacy. Though ironically no objective evidence would be possible for something that did not exist outside of the imagination of humans who believed it to be real, which is food for thought.

There exist no PHYSICAL test, equipment or Objective test to force the spiritual into the physical.

That is always true for non-existent or imaginary things of course.

Let's test your rationale: "There exist no PHYSICAL test, equipment or Objective test to force unicorns or mermaids into the physical". Hmm, are you seeing the own goal yet? Your desire to keep the deity you imagine is real away from objective or critical scrutiny, has just placed in the category of non-existent things.

existence
noun
the fact or state of living or having objective reality.

Ooops!

Every evidence of the spiritual is SUBJECTIVE to the individual persons Experience!

Thank you. Well that wasn't hard was it? Why not just say you have NO objective evidence for any deity? Of course I cannot base belief on the unevidenced subjective opinion of others that they have experienced something. This would be irrational, as I should have to soon acknowledge contradictory claims. What's interesting is your obvious bias here, since you also wouldn't accept the identical claim from other people, if for example someone claimed they saw a mermaid or a unicorn. Or of course all the innumerable claims like yours that people make to have experienced other deities.

There are always two ways to prove any point:

+The claimant can make a proof
+The disclaimer can also make his own proof.

Since I can't get you a physical proof, perhaps you can.

The ball is in your court: Give me your objective proof that the spiritual realm and deities do NOT exist?

This is called an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy (an argument from ignorance). I also have never made any such claim, nor is it an accident that my own rationale, unlike yours, stops short of making unevidenced claims. You sought the atheists here out to make your claim a deity demons and angels exist, the burden of proof is entirely yours, and you have admitted you have no objective evidence at all - only your own subjective opinion to have experienced something.

My bad I said:
I didn't create anything, therefore I ask you for evidence of your claim that NOTHING created everything?

Can you please articulate and present your exact claim with respect to the above subject?

I made no claim that nothing created everything, your question is an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy popular among religious apologists, in an attempt to reverse the burden of proof. I don't know how the universe originated beyond the big bang, no one does. If you want learn the latest thinking on that I suggest you read what the best theoretical physicists have to say. However I do not believe any deity using explicable magic did it, as this is wholly unevidenced, and of course the claim has no explanatory powers whatsoever.

By the way, I know how to use the quote tags. I just prefer it this way because it's more convenient for me, thank you.

TenQ:
Let's put your definition to test:

It's not MY definition, it is the dictionary definition, dictionaries are compiled based on common usage, so you're telling lies again.

Animals lack or have absence of belief in ANY Deity! Does this make animas Atheists?

By definition it would make them atheistic.

Lack
noun
the state of being without or not having enough of something.

Absence
noun
the non-existence or lack of.

Now you seem to be claiming that dogs both can and cannot believe in a deity, so lets clarify. I don’t believe that a dog has the ability to comprehend the concept of deity, if this is the case then it follows they lack such a belief, and thus are atheistic, and they need not have reasoned or made any choice in order to lack such a belief. I on the other hand am also an atheist, as I lack belief in any deity or deities, and I have made choices and used reason to arrive at that lack of theistic belief. Atheism is defined as the lack or absence of belief, I suggest you get over it - since you have ignored my multiple requests to explain how you think choices and reason negate me simply lacking belief in any deity or deities.

It takes cognitive abilities required for abstract thinking for one to have a belief system such as atheism or theism.

We are not talking about a belief system, we are talking about the lack or absence of one particular belief. Atheism is not a belief system, it is the lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities.

There is no objective evidence that will satisfy you for Christians never defined their God as physical but a spirit.

You could have stopped at the first 5 words, as it is clear if you had any evidence, you'd have presented it, instead of this pitiful straw man fallacy.

Your question has been answered.

No, it hasn't. You refused to to even try and present any objective evidence, whilst implying it exists. That is not an answer and it is dishonest. You yet again tried to insert a cryptic appeal to mystery in the form of another question in response. You either think objective evidence exists or you do not, if you do then present it, if not then have the integrity to say so, and possibly present the most compelling reason you think evidences a deity.

TenQ:

You talk too much without thinking

That's a pretty ironic use of an ad hominem fallacy, since you are the one making contradictory statements, and again don't have the integrity to even acknowledge your error, or what it means for your rationale. This is not the first time your arguments have violated the law of non-contradiction either. Physician heal thyself…etc etc. Is it sinking in yet that your arguments are relentlessly irrational?

You sent back from work your car to your house through your driver
1. Can your beloved dog assume that you are in the vehicle and start wagging it's tail and jumping up and down in anticipation?
If the answer is yes, then your dog has a belief you are in the car (until proved wrong)
2. Does your beloved dog have ANY notion of the existence of any kind of Deity? Do you even think this is a possibility?

Your desperate straw man questions about dogs are irrelevant of course. Address your own contradiction. Atheism is simply a lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities, whether it is arrived at by reason and choice or not, it is simply a word that described the lack or absence of theistic belief.

Oh dear... it's not going very well for you, is it?

Of course it really isn't going very well for you. The question is, can you see why?

LordReed:


FSM and the god used to be pals but after FSM started gaining some followers and popularity the god got jealous and put up the gate and walls to stop FSM from coming around. He didn't want the inhabitants of heaven to start following FSM. LoLz.

TenQ:



Is this a statement of TRUTH from your own experience or it is a statement of UNTRUTH?


This is the difference!

It’s a revelation!! I was on a desolate highway on my way to El Paso, Texas. Suddenly, a sphere of light appeared before me, appearing out of thin air as a tiny sphere that gradually got larger. The sphere of light before me, which was the portion of the hypersphere of light from the Almighty Leprechaun in 4D, was the glory of Them. After the hypersphere was recalled into the 4D by the Almighty Leprechaun , a cube appeared the same way the sphere appeared. This cube was the visible 3D version of the 4D hypercube of reality that determines our fate in this 3D world. I saw your fate; quite disappointing but expectedly drab.
This is a revelation. My road to Damascus (El Paso) moment.

TenQ:

Back to square One!

Let me oblige you if this is what is Keeping you from clearly presenting your own views.
The subject of discussion (The Philosophy of Spatial Dimensions and the Spiritual) is discussed as an aspect of Metaphysics, Logic and with a tiny dose of Science.
The principles of discussion had been a mixture of Thought Experiments, Rationality and Conceptual Analysis!

I am not an "academic philosopher" therefore there exist no way I would put my thoughts in the fancy academic format. Are there other principles I could have used? I don't know. Others can fill in the gap as it is not a definitive complete assembly of knowledge on the theme.


Now that I have obliged you, it now your turn to fill this place with your knowledge and opinion!

What I think you are asking (I won't ask you any questions since you think it means more than asking for clarification) is what are the implications of having more than 3 spatial dimensions. AudioMonkey tried to steer you towards what I think is the implication, mainly that it introduces a problem of perception of those higher dimensions for us. The scientific direction indicates that these dimensions may be less than 2mm so indeed we will have a struggle on our hands to perceive what these extra dimensions would look like.

In terms of metaphysics and spirituality I do not think these extra dimensions indicate a "spiritual realm", rather it could imply that there are beings who, very different from us humans, are able to perceive these extra dimensions even the 4th dimension that you don't want to include could be perceived by these beings. I would suggest that these beings will not be invisible rather they would be very much a part of this universe we see and perceive but would be possibly very alien to us physiologically and psychologically since their entire existence would be based on perceptions much more broader than ours. Would we venture to call these beings gods? Depends on your definition of a god. If you think a god is a being who through knowledge is able to do things that you can't then yeah they would be gods to you but they certainly wouldn't be invisible magical creatures performing sleight of hand tricks from just outside your field of view.

Also we can consider that there are humans who for some reason or other are actually able to occassionally get a glimpse of the extra dimensions. Again this doesn't imply anything magical or spiritual, all that may be happening is their consciousness has expanded beyond our usual limited perception of the 3 dimensions we are used to perceiving. Instead of thinking it is magic, we would rather benefit from knowing what causes such expansions (eg psychedelics, meditation, prayer, etc) and tap into it for our own benefit.

KnownUnknown:


It’s a revelation!! I was on a desolate highway on my way to El Paso, Texas. Suddenly, a sphere of light appeared before me, appearing out of thin air as a tiny sphere that gradually got larger. The sphere of light before me, which was the portion of the hypersphere of light from the Almighty Leprechaun in 4D, was the glory of Them. After the hypersphere was recalled into the 4D by the Almighty Leprechaun , a cube appeared the same way the sphere appeared. This cube was the visible 3D version of the 4D hypercube of reality that determines our fate in this 3D world. I saw your fate; quite disappointing but expectedly drab.
This is a revelation. My road to Damascus (El Paso) moment.

I got mine on route 66!

Get Your Kicks On Route Sixty-Six


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDoAjU9poJ8&pp=ygUaZ2V0IHlvdXIga2lja3Mgb24gcm91dGUgNjY%3D&theme=dark&persist_gl=1&gl=US&persist_hl=1&hl=en

LordReed:


I got mine on route 66!

Get Your Kicks On Route Sixty-Six


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDoAjU9poJ8&pp=ygUaZ2V0IHlvdXIga2lja3Mgb24gcm91dGUgNjY%3D&theme=dark&persist_gl=1&gl=US&persist_hl=1&hl=en

I feel you, This is the song that was playing when a hypervoice called out from 4D:
Behold, here is Nature Boy, in whom I am well pleased! Behold, the Son of Woman!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQerH4nRTUA&pp=ygULbmF0dXJlIGJveSA%3D

KnownUnknown:


I feel you, This is the song that was playing when a hypervoice called out from 4D:
Behold, here is Nature Boy, in whom I am well pleased! Behold, the Son of Woman!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQerH4nRTUA&pp=ygULbmF0dXJlIGJveSA%3D

This right here is all the "spirituality" I need. I don't need no stinking extra dimension to be "spiritual". Ol' Nat was the GOAT!

LordReed:


So if I choose not to have beer In my house I don't lack beer in my house?

You choose not to have beer in your house but you are forever lamenting about beer, are you okay? You choose not to have beer in your house and LoLz around that there is no beer. Is that normal?

TenQ:

Back to square One!

Let me oblige you if this is what is Keeping you from clearly presenting your own views.
The subject of discussion (The Philosophy of Spatial Dimensions and the Spiritual) is discussed as an aspect of Metaphysics, Logic and with a tiny dose of Science.
The principles of discussion had been a mixture of Thought Experiments, Rationality and Conceptual Analysis!

I am not an "academic philosopher" therefore there exist no way I would put my thoughts in the fancy academic format. Are there other principles I could have used? I don't know. Others can fill in the gap as it is not a definitive complete assembly of knowledge on the theme.


Now that I have obliged you, it now your turn to fill this place with your knowledge and opinion!

Here is an interactive tool to help with visualising 4d objects.

https://baileysnyder.com/interactive-4d/4d-spheres/

KnownUnknown:


It’s a revelation!! I was on a desolate highway on my way to El Paso, Texas. Suddenly, a sphere of light appeared before me, appearing out of thin air as a tiny sphere that gradually got larger. The sphere of light before me, which was the portion of the hypersphere of light from the Almighty Leprechaun in 4D, was the glory of Them. After the hypersphere was recalled into the 4D by the Almighty Leprechaun , a cube appeared the same way the sphere appeared. This cube was the visible 3D version of the 4D hypercube of reality that determines our fate in this 3D world. I saw your fate; quite disappointing but expectedly drab.
This is a revelation. My road to Damascus (El Paso) moment.

Is this a statement of TRUTH from your own experience or it is a statement of UNTRUTH?

LordReed:


What I think you are asking (I won't ask you any questions since you think it means more than asking for clarification) is what are the implications of having more than 3 spatial dimensions. AudioMonkey tried to steer you towards what I think is the implication, mainly that it introduces a problem of perception of those higher dimensions for us. The scientific direction indicates that these dimensions may be less than 2mm so indeed we will have a struggle on our hands to perceive what these extra dimensions would look like.

In terms of metaphysics and spirituality I do not think these extra dimensions indicate a "spiritual realm", rather it could imply that there are beings who, very different from us humans, are able to perceive these extra dimensions even the 4th dimension that you don't want to include could be perceived by these beings.

I would suggest that these beings will not be invisible rather they would be very much a part of this universe we see and perceive but would be possibly very alien to us physiologically and psychologically since their entire existence would be based on perceptions much more broader than ours.

Would we venture to call these beings gods? Depends on your definition of a god. If you think a god is a being who through knowledge is able to do things that you can't then yeah they would be gods to you but they certainly wouldn't be invisible magical creatures performing sleight of hand tricks from just outside your field of view.

Also we can consider that there are humans who for some reason or other are actually able to occassionally get a glimpse of the extra dimensions. Again this doesn't imply anything magical or spiritual, all that may be happening is their consciousness has expanded beyond our usual limited perception of the 3 dimensions we are used to perceiving. Instead of thinking it is magic, we would rather benefit from knowing what causes such expansions (eg psychedelics, meditation, prayer, etc) and tap into it for our own benefit.

I wish you started with 1D, then 2D, then 3D then postulate what you think will be in 4D and beyond.

Only after this will it be reasonable to jump to your stated conclusions above.
Thought Experiments are such only because they more often than not are not possible to perform in the laboratory. AudioMonkey's point of view was that only 3D is real: thus 1D, 2D, 4D and any higher dimension is mere paper theory not worth anything. If this is the case the whole field of "Thought Experiments" in philosophy is nonsensical. Do you agree with this?

The Highlighted in yellow coming from a self proclaimed atheist is interesting.
Can you please give one or two examples where this has/can occurred?
You said:
Again this doesn't imply anything magical or spiritual, all that may be happening is their consciousness has expanded beyond our usual limited perception of the 3 dimensions we are used to perceiving.
What nomenclature do you have for this reality which you say defies our limited perception of 3D?


It seems to me that you feel there are some aspects of our reality to which our senses cannot perceive, however, you think we should not call it spiritual nor attribute it to anything higher than us (eg deities or magical): Am I correct with this opinion?

TenQ:

Is this a statement of TRUTH from your own experience or it is a statement of UNTRUTH?

It’s a revelation!! I was on a desolate highway on my way to El Paso, Texas. Suddenly, a sphere of light appeared before me, appearing out of thin air as a tiny sphere that gradually got larger. The sphere of light before me, which was the portion of the hypersphere of light from the Almighty Leprechaun in 4D, was the glory of Them. After the hypersphere was recalled into the 4D by the Almighty Leprechaun , a cube appeared the same way the sphere appeared. This cube was the visible 3D version of the 4D hypercube of reality that determines our fate in this 3D world. I saw your fate; quite disappointing but expectedly drab.
This is a revelation. My road to Damascus (El Paso) moment.

LordReed:


Here is an interactive tool to help with visualising 4d objects.

https://baileysnyder.com/interactive-4d/4d-spheres/

Thanks for the aid: even though its still really difficult visualizing slices of 4D in 3D space because we are supposed to have infinitly large number of slices to build a picture of the 4D. It has however been educative

Thanks

TenQ:

Thanks for the aid: even though its still really difficult visualizing slices of 4D in 3D space because we are supposed to have infinitly large number of slices to build a picture of the 4D. It has however been educative

Thanks

Christ fucking Jesus you’re a slowpoke!!! Even with the visual aid provided you still insist on your nonsensical “infinitely large number of slices”. You are beyond stupid.

Dream17:


That's a pretty ironic use of an ad hominem fallacy, since you are the one making contradictory statements, and again don't have the integrity to even acknowledge your error, or what it means for your rationale. This is not the first time your arguments have violated the law of non-contradiction either. Physician heal thyself…etc etc. Is it sinking in yet that your arguments are relentlessly irrational?

And when I accuse you of being emotional, you take it unkindly. Can't you address issues without name calling and slanderous remarks?
Here was what I said:

TenQ:

You talk too much without thinking
You sent back from work your car to your house through your driver
1. Can your beloved dog assume that you are in the vehicle and start wagging it's tail and jumping up and down in anticipation?
If the answer is yes, then your dog has a belief you are in the car (until proved wrong)
2. Does your beloved dog have ANY notion of the existence of any kind of Deity? Do you even think this is a possibility?
Oh dear... it's not going very well for you, is it?

Check carefully, you haven't addressed the question at all!

Dream17:

Your desperate straw man questions about dogs are irrelevant of course. Address your own contradiction. Atheism is simply a lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities, whether it is arrived at by reason and choice or not, it is simply a word that described the lack or absence of theistic belief.

Address the issue please!
Repeating a claim doesn't make it true!

Dream17:

Of course it really isn't going very well for you. The question is, can you see why?

If you had answered the questions you would have seen why I said you are emotional

Let me point you to the beginning!
I said:
Even Animals can form a Belief!
Then I said:
a dog or any other animal CANNOT believe or disbelief or have any kind of opinion about any diety.

You quoted these two posts of mine and
You said:
Oh dear... it's not going very well for you, is it?


I thus then helped you with a little plot to show you that
1. Animals can form a Belief
Except you think animals can form a belief about a deity (which I don't think is true of you)

Unfortunately since you didn't know that there is a difference between Animals having a Belief and Animals NOT having a Belief in Deities, you screamed your That's a pretty ironic use of an ad hominem fallacy

Is it a pretty ironic use of an ad hominem fallacy that there is a difference between Animals having a Belief and Animals NOT having a Belief in Deities, ?

TenQ:

I wish you started with 1D, then 2D, then 3D then postulate what you think will be in 4D and beyond.

Why do you think it is necessary?

Only after this will it be reasonable to jump to your stated conclusions above.
Thought Experiments are such only because they more often than not are not possible to perform in the laboratory. AudioMonkey's point of view was that only 3D is real: thus 1D, 2D, 4D and any higher dimension is mere paper theory not worth anything. If this is the case the whole field of "Thought Experiments" in philosophy is nonsensical. Do you agree with this?

Once again that was not AudioMonkey's point. His point, if I may be bold enough to speak to it, is our perception is limited to 3 dimensions even though we are aware of the extra dimensions. We can try to visualise what those extra dimensions would mean/look like but the result will be imperfect because of our limitation. He is not saying only 3 dimensions exist and you would do well to stop misinterpreting what he said and ask questions if you don't understand it.

Well structured thought experiments provide sufficient information going in, in other to produce helpful conclusions. Eg Schrodinger's cat. We are not going to get anything useful if we start with fictions.

The Highlighted in yellow coming from a self proclaimed atheist is interesting.
Can you please give one or two examples where this has/can occurred?
You said:
Again this doesn't imply anything magical or spiritual, all that may be happening is their consciousness has expanded beyond our usual limited perception of the 3 dimensions we are used to perceiving.
What nomenclature do you have for this reality which you say defies our limited perception of 3D?

It seems to me that you feel there are some aspects of our reality to which our senses cannot perceive, however, you think we should not call it spiritual nor attribute it to anything higher than us (eg deities or magical): Am I correct with this opinion?

I dunno why you think this is special. First off, I was being speculative about the explanation for certain things we observe under certain conditions. For instance some people under psychedelic influence seem to be able to be prescient, could it be that the psychedelics are breaking that limitation to perceiving only 3 dimensions? I don't know but I am willing to speculate that it is as a way of explaining it. Next, of course there are aspects of our reality our senses cannot perceive. This is why we develop tools to get at those. These are not magical things so I see no reason to think that extra dimensions are any different.

.