₦airaland Forum

LegalWolf:
Hey FxMasterz

Did you not claim that King David, Solomon and the likes never heard the word Samaritan before? Without any explicit proof?

And you expect me to be engaging an hopelessly, adamantly and ignorant fella? Ehn? Humour me please 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Cc: potential theif TenQ ooooo

Unfortunately, you don't know that Northern Israel was also known as Samaria, or Ephraim or the northern kingdom
after the United Israel was divided into TWO kingdoms in the days of Solomon's Son Rehoboam. The Northern kingdom consist of 10 tribes of Israel while the southern kingdom consisted of just two tribes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehoboam
2 Chronicles 10–12,
1 Kings 12 and
1 Kings 14:21-31

Read up if you like: SMH!

No shame!

FxMasterz:
Yes, I noticed that they've mellowed down for some weeks now. I'm even begining to think that legalwolf has left Nairaland.

They should just have their own individual reflections and open themselves up to truth. Loyalty to a religion is useless. No religion saves, including Christianity. The only Person who saves is Jesus.

They should look away from religion and find Jesus because Jesus is always eager to manifest Himself to those who seek Him. Mohammed on the other hand is dead. His fate is eternally sealed. No amount of PBUH that Muslims send to him on a daily basis can save him. He was mightily used of Satan to send many people to hell. And those people went gladly until they came face to face with reality in the hereafter.

LegalWolf has not left Nairaland.
He rarely comments now as his gra-gra has been met with so many shameful informations about Mohammed, Allah, the Quran and the religion of Islam that he cannot refute without looking stupid.

His usual strategy of occupying space by writing unrelated and uncoordinated spams is painfully obvious to both Muslims and Christians: the Muslims who want an answer are put off as they are not helped by his meaningless rhetorics.

I guess some people wiser than him advised him to keep quiet as silence is sometimes golden.

For the others, they find it strange that Christians are finding information with undeniable proofs against their esteemed religion. Some ot the topics need no further debate as it is a losing battle.

A001:
No. I never told you I was one. I am an agnostic.

All agnostics are first atheists: the distinction is in the degree of certainty as agnostics will say
"we don't have sufficient information/we don't know for sure"
It wasn't still an accusation: I was wondering that you said:

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.

Most Atheists will discard the above as other realms of existence!

A001:
Where I did list deep meditation, NDE/OOBE, lucid dreams, and other hypnagogic phases/states as experiments in the comment you quoted? What you're asking is what scientists call gedanken or thought experiments, and I stated the answer lies in Mathematics. Whether it's 2D or 3D, mathematics will give you the best proof. You should know this domain lies within mathematics.

I can design a simple thought experiment to answer your question, but I'll still fall back to mathematics to prove my hypothesis. If the mathematics isn't well developed, you can't prove the existence of higher dimensions.

You did NOT say deep meditation, NDE/OOBE, lucid dreams, and other hypnagogic phases/states are experiments
I used them as examples of observables
I said:
You've not given an answer because the keyword was EXPERIMENT: deep meditation, NDE/OOBE, lucid dreams and other hypnagogic phases/states for now are all SUBJECTIVE in nature. Experiments must be Objective and Repeatable.

Check the colon!
I was simply asking you for EXPERIMENTS

A001:
It all boils down to mathematics as explained above.

I was asking for Experiments not mathematics

A001:
My answer has a theoretical basis in Physics and Mathematics. Nothing spiritual or supernatural at all. It all boils down to the principle of superposition of waves.

I can give a simplified definition of this based on superposition, resonance, and coherence. But I'll be revealing key parts of a book and a paper I'm working on currently on the subject. That's not meant for Nairaland conversation.

These scientific studies explain the issue deeply:

--"Consciousness in the Universe is Tuned by a Musical Master Code: A Hydrodynamic Superfluid Quantum Space Guides a Conformal Mental Attribute of Reality. The Hard Problem in Consciousness Studies Revisited" by Dirk K. F. Meijer, Igor Jerman, Alexey V. Melkikh and Valeriy I. Sbitnev.
--"Universal Consciousness: Collective Evidence on the Basis of Current Physics and Philosophy of Mind. Part 1" by Dirk K.F. Meijer

They're available for free online.

The Question was:
We know that a person in a higher dimension can interact with those in the lower dimensions: is the converse possible?

Your response was a YES to the question and you followed up with
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.

Since you mentioned deep meditations, NDEs and astra travels (fields normally claimed by spiritual persons)

I think you habve clarified it by saying
Nothing spiritual or supernatural at all. It all boils down to the principle of superposition of waves.

AudioMonkey:
Stop putting words in my mouth. You misunderstand the concepts and again misunderstood the language employed in explaining the concepts. Who does that?
For the 1000th time, I never ever said only 3D is real. All the dimensions are real.
0D (I can't say, perhaps this dimension is the "nothing" from which God created every other thing)
1D (maybe forces, I don't care to know RN)
2D (maybe motion, I don't GAF what it is RN)
3D (dimension for physical objects like I've been saying)
4D (likely space - time dimension, like I said previously) etc
Now, what I said is, as far as physical objects are concerned, they exist in the 3D. Nothing like 4D tesseract or 2D shape objects or 1D line. Every real life object is a full-fledged 3D object no matter how microscopic or how much you slice it or merge them, you will get a 3D object as a final result always.
Nonetheless, given the free world we live in, where people can say things the way they want it said, people still choose to relate the terms 0D/1D/2D/4D to physical objects.
If that is the case, then we can have 0D/1D/2D/4D "view/perception" of a physical 3D object or 0D/1D/2D/4D "representation" of a physical object on paper for various purposes but in real life, physical objects exist and remain as 3D objects.
I am calling on LordReed as my witness as I correct you and explain things to you for the 1000th time.

Now before I leave, guess what TenQ, I engaged Chatgpt, asking the same 2D shape question. At first, nigga mentioned flat shapes with big area and "tiny thickness". Then I asked him, if these "2D" flat shapes still managed to necessarily possess thickness, though tiny, why did he call them 2D? To my surprise, it immediately apologized and admitted I was right.
That has got me wondering how on earth, an ordinary AI still in early stages of development go come get sense pass you in this world.
Initially when I came into the thread, I was excited but now, you disappoint me, son.

I quoted you extensively in replying to LordReed.

And let me quote you here again , make your deductions

AudioMonkey:
...
Again I say, there's nothing like 1D/2D objects just as you were not able to give an example of one, nor is there any 4D object, everything in real life exist as 3D, xyz object, nothing else below or above this.
0D/1D/2D are just classifications of perception and not classification of real-life objects. While dots, lines, shapes, pixels are theoretical objects on paper for theoretical purposes, analysis and computation. In reality they don't exist outside display on paper or other medium.
A tiny line in reality is a full 3D object, ball point is full 3D object, a rectangular plane is a full 3D object with tangible area but infinitesimal height.
For any object to exist as an object in space, it must posses all three xyz space values.
In space it's just 3D, three x, y, z. Or can you mention anything else outside this? No.
All objects exists and ends as 3D space objects. Nothing short or more of this.
That is why 4D is not a space quantity, rather it's another entirely different dimension and that is likely time.
A 3D space object is just a slice of space-time and maybe space-time is also a slice of something higher and so is our perception which can only view 3D objects per a particular time.
Space-time 4D is not a problem of detection because we know it is time, rather it's a problem of perception - our inability to view an objects in different times at once, we can only view a slice of space-time per time.
Motion blur images are theoretical depiction of space-time, 3d objects and it's motion in different times captured as a single perception. More like capturing space-time.
In real life, there might be creatures or organisms that may be able to perceive in 4D.

1D/2D object doesn't exist, same as 4D object.
Space starts and ends in 3D.
4D is space-time and 3D is a slice of it.
space - time may be a slice of something else.
It may go on and on like that.

JustAnotherGuy:
The bolded is 100% incorrect and spoken exactly as a Christian who has not read his own bible. Jesus was completely human and completely god. If not, there is no Christianity. God himself manifests multiple times in physical form in your own religious text. (Independent of his manifestation as Jesus.) All you have shown is that you are an ignorant representation of the faith you profess to believe in.

Your ignorance need no response!

JustAnotherGuy:
@underlined, So, let me see if I understand you correctly….no Xtians would say their god IS a physical being, but it WAS a physical being in the past, correct? If the latter is the case, was that god still not subject to natural/physical laws? All of them? Just some of them? None of them? Only occasionally? If their god did indeed exist in the physical world, can you provide proof for that? Don’t Xtians also think their god currently manipulates the physical world? How is that possible if their god exists outside of it? If their god does manipulate the physical world, shouldn’t there be some way to prove that?

It’s just so confusing! I hope you can help with these questions.

First read up the first page, then come back an represent your questions as I will gladly answer them.
The topic is about the philosophy of spatial dimensions and the spiritual: its not a debate about God!

JustAnotherGuy:
@underlined, LOL, You have confused the social construct of gender with biology.
This would be a different thread though./ No need to reply, just know there is debate on the subject of gender identity.

1. Can you show me how to identify male dogs from among female dogs?
2. If your biology is correct with dogs, why should it be wrong with humans?
3. When archaeologists see the skeletons of an adult male, would it be defined male or female by social construct or through biology?
4. Does majority of people on the earth define gender by biology or by social construct?
5. Can I give myself the social construct of a 6 year old white American at the American Embassy even though my parents (biology) are black Nigerians?

If you are TRUTHFUL, answer these 5 questions!

If you ask me, his madness is getting to the level of insanity!

JustAnotherGuy:
TenQ, since there is no physical proof for God, we can rule out prayer, miracles, prophecies, personal experience, and other physical manifestations of your so-called God thing. Without physical evidence for your god claim, your god and non-existence are identical. Thank you for playing, do not pass go, and do not collect the prize money. All you have done is support the atheist position,.

If you had just followed the logic rather than repeat a rhetoric:

If you are a 2D observer in a 2D space within the earth, would you be able to prove that 3D objects exist all around you?

I waiting for your answer!

LordReed:
Why do you think it is necessary?

A thought experiment makes sense only when followed logically from its foundation (well structured) and from known to unknown.
When the foundation is skipped, we arrive at a faulty projection into the unknown.

LordReed:
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.

You may rephrase what you think AudioMonkey is saying but check our argument: It wasn't this. He was of the point that 1D, 2D and 4D etc do not exist in reality.

Why bother with a philosophical Question of the Philosophy of Spatial Dimension and the spiritual realm when the answer or conclusion is that is that NOTHING can exist outside the 3D space!

AudioMonkey:
...
Again I say, there's nothing like 1D/2D objects just as you were not able to give an example of one, nor is there any 4D object, everything in real life exist as 3D, xyz object, nothing else below or above this.
0D/1D/2D are just classifications of perception and not classification of real-life objects. While dots, lines, shapes, pixels are theoretical objects on paper for theoretical purposes, analysis and computation. In reality they don't exist outside display on paper or other medium.
A tiny line in reality is a full 3D object, ball point is full 3D object, a rectangular plane is a full 3D object with tangible area but infinitesimal height.
For any object to exist as an object in space, it must posses all three xyz space values.
In space it's just 3D, three x, y, z. Or can you mention anything else outside this? No.
All objects exists and ends as 3D space objects. Nothing short or more of this.
That is why 4D is not a space quantity, rather it's another entirely different dimension and that is likely time.
A 3D space object is just a slice of space-time and maybe space-time is also a slice of something higher and so is our perception which can only view 3D objects per a particular time.
Space-time 4D is not a problem of detection because we know it is time, rather it's a problem of perception - our inability to view an objects in different times at once, we can only view a slice of space-time per time.
Motion blur images are theoretical depiction of space-time, 3d objects and it's motion in different times captured as a single perception. More like capturing space-time.
In real life, there might be creatures or organisms that may be able to perceive in 4D.

1D/2D object doesn't exist, same as 4D object.
Space starts and ends in 3D.
4D is space-time and 3D is a slice of it.
space - time may be a slice of something else.
It may go on and on like that.

His conclusion if I may put it in another word:
Only 3D objects in 3D space exist, there's no need projecting into 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th ,6th dimensions.


This is another level of argument for anyone interested.

LordReed:
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.

My Questions were all based on your claims which were surprising to me and thus needed clarifications

You said:
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.
My Question:
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.
My Question:
What nomenclature do you have for this reality which you say defies our limited perception of 3D?

I am not attacking you my friend , I just want to understand your view
You also said:
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.

I know you probably are not speaking as an atheist here but as a philosopher but truly, I want to understand these.
Thanks

A001:
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.

Its still future tense: unfortunately, when you look at fractals, you'll change your mind. Why?
The more you know, the more there still exist to know.
This is the reality we find ourself in the universe

Science and Spirituality are not in competition.
Science deals with the physical observables, measurables and rules by which they operate with a view of blending them to serve us
Spirituality deals with the aspect of our mind, inner peace, beneficial behaviour in relation to non material forces of interest

A001:
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.

I agree with you here except that our senses cannot graps 4D

A001:
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.

You said:
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.

Does this mean that you are not an atheist?

A001:
The answer lies in Mathematics and broadening of scope. Whether higher dimensions exist or not is a problem of perception.

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

You've not given an answer because the keyword was EXPERIMENT: deep meditation, NDE/OOBE, lucid dreams and other hypnagogic phases/states for now are all SUBJECTIVE in nature. Experiments must be Objective and Repeatable.

A001:
Your question is poorly framed. There's nothing like having perfect scientific knowledge in science. No scientific knowledge is perfect or absolute.

The objective is to discuss a Philosophical and not Scientific question. Using the 1D, 2D and 3D thougth experiment, the question is for instnce: if we are observsers in the 2D space and we know everything about our space, would this knowledge help us to comprehend the 3D space.

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

A001:
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.

I think you have answered this question from a non scientific point of view.
From spiritual point of view the answer is YES
BUT
from non spiritual point of view, is the answer also a YES?

Dream17:
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?

Emotional outburst!
You called me a Liar because I claim to disagree with some dictionary definition!
This is indeed the definition of lies.
LOL!

Dream17:
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.

Does EVERYONE agree with the definition of Woman as
'an adult who lives and identifies as a female even though they have been born as a different sex. '

Your claim: (is like)
Anyone who doesn't agree with this stupid definition is a Liar!
Think please.

Dream17:
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.

Even though I still ANSWERED your Question within the same post, you needed to first argue that I didnt answer you candidly
I said:
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!


Prior to this, I had answered this same question.
You said:

I didn't create anything. I asked for evidence of your claim.

My Response:

TenQ:
It doesn't dawn on you that there are two ways to make a proof.
The claimant can make a proof
The disclaimer can also make his own proof.

There is not one single Christian who says that God is a Physical Being and there exist no physical proof of God because He is not subject to the natural/physical laws. Since there exist no physical proof, then the ball is in your hands

Of course, to you, I was presenting dishonest straw man, implying that objective evidence exists but that I would not accept it, and without presenting anything.

Dream17:
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.

I said objective evidence is not possible for spiritual things, you state the contrary (in red)

There are two ways to make a proof.
The claimant can make a proof
The disclaimer can also make his own proof.
It is your turn to prove that no spirit dimension or deities exist (please don't forget to recognise that Christians say they are spirits)

Dream17:
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!



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.



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.



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.

In your wisdom, every non objective evidence is a figment of imagination.
It just shows how myopic your reasoning is

Looks like you just read a book on Fallacies in Arguments and in every opportunity, whether true or not, you just want to show you've been to the library. Continue!
Of course, you didn't create anything: but you didn't realize that i just modified your quote and presented it to you.

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, ?

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

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?

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?

LegalWolf:
Heyyy potential thief TenQ

I know you must be brimming with pride that this topic has amassed 9 pages! Fantabulous! T

hat people could spare their time debating with an slowpoke beats my imagination.. or it doesn't?

For me, I have a question for your: who is the greatest thief of the 21st century? Most of the renowned thieves I know died in the previous century but there is none of renown repute in our age... or don't you relish the rear privilege of wearing that crown?

Hugs, from your ONLY nairaland wolf

Thanks you're at least able to speak since your last flogging on NL.
Whenever you have totally recovered and you need a little more spanking, come to any of my page.
Till then, your Only Nemesis on Nairaland TenQ

FxMasterz:
Hmmmmmm. The bolded is weighty.

Yet, people like antichristian, legalwolf, drlateef, etc are earnestly praying to die as Muslims in spite of this obvious deception.

You'll note that all these your friends gra-gra has reduced on Nairaland. It is difficult fighting against the truth when good EVIDENCES are attached.

What better evidence can one use against Islam? The Qur'an, the Tafsirs, the Hadiths and Books from their Scholars.

Good cannot be defended with lies as it is not necessary! Unfortunately, Islam has to be defended with lies to stand!

FxMasterz:
I can relate with your second observation. I encountered it while searching for a quranic verse online where Allah was swearing with the moon. Only few links came up. None of them contained the actual verse. The entire articles were spurious explanations muddled up with several unrelated verses without referencing any.

The most annoying thing is that, rather than quote the verse, the refer to it by its name. Seems, some of those verses have names they call them. So, if you're not a Muslim, you'll be totally lost as regarding the argument.

A very organized and well calculated method of deception.

I agree with you. They don't want the Muslim or the reader to be able to do an independent search so that he is fixated on other things than the original question causing the problem.

You will also note that when they translate their Tafsirs, sometimes they just truncate a large part of the discuss to present only the agreeable part.


Most of their problematic books also have not being translated into English.


Indeed, Islam is a religion based on deception. They DECEIVE themselves just as the try to DECEIVE others

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!

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!

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!

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:
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

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.

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?

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?

KnownUnknown:
Or



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

I am tempted to call you a fool but I can't.

1. If a 2D Observer in a 2D space is within a 3D environment, will it see
a. Objects from the 3D space in 2D or 3D form?
b. Under what conditions would objects in 3D space completely invisible to this 2D Observer?

FxMasterz:
.
They should keep deceiving themselves.

I noticed two things with refutations by Muslims dawahrists. It is usually very long with several unrelated matters to the argument inserted just to make it impossible to read up and confuse the readers.

Secondly, the offending Hadiths are not quoted but every other hadith (many times without traceable references) would be quoted.

It may not apply to all but this is my observation for now

HellVictorinho6:
the universe doesnt exist since existence has no totality.

Since everything around you is a subset of the universe, what you are saying is that you don't exist and the earth doesn't exist, neither the sun, the moon and other planets and stars.
This doesn't make sense!

FxMasterz:
That means it wasn't the poison that killed him. He died because his aorta was cut according to his own personal confession.

TenQ is absolutely correct.

You think they want to hear the truth?

They have succeeded to make Mohammed Assistant-Allah by the way they rever him.

They don't realise that they have made Mohammed equal or at par with Allah in knowledge when the say:
"Allah and his messanger know best!"

In this case Mohammed himself says his Aorta is being cut (according to the curse of Allah) BUT Muslims say he died a natural death.

HellVictorinho6:
that means there is where those do not exist. U cant have a sum without a limit.

Since no one knows the limit of the universe, we lack any information to conclude on anything

The webpage of title
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the Taking of Poison:
A Rebuttal to David Wood's Video "Who Killed Muhammad?"
by
Bassam Zawadi
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/prophet_muhammad__peace_be_upon_him__and_the_taking_of_poison

Did not answer any of my objections o!
Who will help