|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subconscious...the reason for 90% of these topics
Yes another topic I wrote that bashes religion.
Anyways...I am a new user of these forums but at least 80-90% of the topics I read are badly put together theories that are unknowingly based off the human subconscious. Example: http://www.frihost.com/forums/vt-73462.html
This topic attempts to make a complicated sounded explanation for a simple phenomenon, human subconscious. Like religion, God may or not be simply one lonely Middle Eastern traveller's fantasy to restore peace to the Middle East 3000 years ago. I am saying so many false theories could have been avoided had the creators looked for truth within the human brain's subconscious.
Please don't call me Freud that dudes crazy
On a second note, humans always tend to "magicalize" and "glamorize" everything. For example, someone sees an acquaintance at the store and might say "It was because of that Tarot reader the other day" or it was "God's will." Was it God's will that the other 340 times they went to the store they say none of their friends, not even acquaintances? Humans always make one weak incident a "proof of a miracle."
Anyways...I am a new user of these forums but at least 80-90% of the topics I read are badly put together theories that are unknowingly based off the human subconscious. Example: http://www.frihost.com/forums/vt-73462.html
This topic attempts to make a complicated sounded explanation for a simple phenomenon, human subconscious. Like religion, God may or not be simply one lonely Middle Eastern traveller's fantasy to restore peace to the Middle East 3000 years ago. I am saying so many false theories could have been avoided had the creators looked for truth within the human brain's subconscious.
Please don't call me Freud that dudes crazy
On a second note, humans always tend to "magicalize" and "glamorize" everything. For example, someone sees an acquaintance at the store and might say "It was because of that Tarot reader the other day" or it was "God's will." Was it God's will that the other 340 times they went to the store they say none of their friends, not even acquaintances? Humans always make one weak incident a "proof of a miracle."
| Quote: |
| What if God was one of us?
Just a stranger on the bus Trying to make his way home? |
Cute...but you still need quote tags!
- The Moderating TeamHumans do tend to take whatever they see (no matter how contradictory) as evidence to support their pre-concieved notions. However, this happens on all sides of the religion debate (as it does in most other debates as well), and should therefore not be accepted as proof one way or the other.
The only way to conclusively proove anything is by scientific procedure, but looking at the world strictly by scientific means of thought, I cannot even prove my hand exists, much less any supernatural being(s) or the abscence thereof. Therefore, we must make whatever assumptions seem most likely, then use them. This may mean our view of the universe is fundamentally flawed, but it still allows us to make more use of it than if we were all sitting around trying to determine whether or not our hands exist.
The only way to conclusively proove anything is by scientific procedure, but looking at the world strictly by scientific means of thought, I cannot even prove my hand exists, much less any supernatural being(s) or the abscence thereof. Therefore, we must make whatever assumptions seem most likely, then use them. This may mean our view of the universe is fundamentally flawed, but it still allows us to make more use of it than if we were all sitting around trying to determine whether or not our hands exist.
Um...I don't know what kind of science you study, but the science they teach you in college says otherwise.
^ I mean that there are other explanations possible for the sensations my brain receives that make me believe I have a hand.
By scientific thought, I mean logical progression starting with absolutely no assumptions. I can determine that some part of me exists, because "I think, therefore I am", but that is the limit.
By scientific thought, I mean logical progression starting with absolutely no assumptions. I can determine that some part of me exists, because "I think, therefore I am", but that is the limit.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| What if God was one of us?
Just a stranger on the bus Trying to make his way home? |
What do you want to say with that? I don't get your point.
| poly wrote: | ||
What do you want to say with that? I don't get your point. |
reynolds specializes in being vague.
| EanofAthenasPrime wrote: | ||||
reynolds specializes in being vague. |
| mike1reynolds wrote: | ||||||
|
They do have a point; couldn't you just explain what you meant by it?
Being able to explain what you meant would make the difference in being percieved as someone who had a very interesting insight or being percieved as someone who posts nonsense and rudely refuses to explain it.
Notice I'm not accusing you of being the latter type of person, just giving you a choice of how you want to be percieved.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| ^ I mean that there are other explanations possible for the sensations my brain receives that make me believe I have a hand.
By scientific thought, I mean logical progression starting with absolutely no assumptions. I can determine that some part of me exists, because "I think, therefore I am", but that is the limit. |
Just FWIW, scientific thought does make a few assumptions (so your definition is a little off), but for exactly the reason you are bringing up - without a few assumptions science would be impossible. These assumptions are integral to the scientific process.
 |