At 5/18/11 09:13 PM, dark-fox wrote:
While this is all very interesting, I don't see your point, this site isn't really home to existential and philosphical debates or whatever...Besides, this is nothing new.
I wrote it as a presentation and was proud of my work. I did it mostly for myself, but I wanted to share my work- as well as open it up for discussion with those who might be interested. I find that generally that's the easiest way to get furthest in most philosophies. Newgrounds is honestly one of the only communities I am familiar enough with where I felt comfortable sharing (despite any inferred irony) and thought I could guarantee some sort of feedback.
In fact most of what you're saying sounds a lot like http://www.truthcontest.com/
And those guys are nut jobs that think they got life figured out, and like you said it is rather arrogant to say we are the highest form of sentient life, so why do they think they solved life's mysteries?
Thanks for sharing that link, man. It looks pretty interesting, actually. Sure, some people might have some far-out and whacky ideas, but I think having places to share those ideas is important. Plus it gives me another place to share mine.
Hell, philosophy is nothing but intellectual masturbation, no matter what you believe what we percieve isn't going to change because of it.
Maybe not what you perceive, but how you perceive it. I know that personally the way that I regard life, people- and everything- has changed immensely over just the past year or so.
But to each his own I suppose.
Indeed. I appreciate your response.
At 5/18/11 09:34 PM, LucasJC wrote:
Hmmm... Interesting. *Leaves thread without reading anything.*
Then why bother posting anything at all?
At 5/18/11 09:53 PM, Lumber-Jax12 wrote:
Good read, I actually read the whole thing, you got a way with words, and its a very interesting thought, personally I just can't accept the "where here because we just are" debate, but thats just me.
Thanks, man- I really appreciate it! To support my theory I'll state that I believe that the vastness and 'time' of the Universe is infinite. It's impossible for us to truly grasp the concept of infinity since we are finite beings (probably), but with the God Argument, one could say "Well before there was God, what was there that created him?". I think that any answer that can be made for that proves infinity as an existing concept. So then the question is, do you place infinity in the realms of Existence itself (which we know exists), or do you credit that infinity to an all knowing, all powerful being?
Here's an interesting philosophical question (or paradox, take your pick) for the Monotheistic: Could an all-powerful God create a stone so heavy that he could not lift it?.
Either a yes or no answer to that question is contradictory. Yet the same conundrum doesn't effect my Physiomonistic Pantheism. As something that creates/changes naturally, The Universe wouldn't even conceive the idea to do such a thing- particularly as 'lifting' in itself would require a conscious decision or effort to do so.
PS- Ehh i would leave out the religion for this post, I was not offended by the "prayer does not work" bit, but some might, its not really necessary.
I can understand your concerns, but I believe that anyone close-minded enough to not understand where I'm coming from on that front will probably find this whole thing pretty offensive anyway. Thanks for the good response!
At 5/18/11 10:24 PM, Cootie wrote:
Thomas Jefferson actually cut out the phrases of the Bible he thought was untrue and nonsense... he was left with only 80 pages.
That's fascinating- I'll look into that. Thanks for your response!
At 5/19/11 12:34 AM, HollowedPumkinz wrote:
Do have any idea how much time you wasted on a thread barely anyone will read?
I really enjoyed writing it, actually. I wrote it strictly for my own benefit, but I wanted to share it with those who might be interested (take a look at the thread, Bub. Some people read and appreciated it.) I'm sorry that you were not able to.
A topic is suppose to be a summarized paragraph of content that is debatable and could lead to a discussion of some sort, no your lunatic rantings and ravings about your philosophy on the Universe. Leave it for your Blog and learn how to make a Topic before you waste the thousands of characters given on nothing.
I wrote this in the format of an article (with a fairly standard 5 paragraphs), and then left it open for discussion. It's not my fault that you personally equate my ideas with lunacy, but I certainly don't agree that it was a waste of time.
Remember: Summarize your topics. If it takes more than 30 seconds to read, IT'S TOO FUCKING LONG. This isn't a college class and no one here expects your dissertation right at this moment.
You don't speak for everyone, dude. If you don't like a topic, don't post on it and it will be that much more likely to go away. That's how forums work. Unfortunately it seems it's you who has wasted time by typing, after all.
At 5/19/11 12:37 AM, Slingshot wrote:
Jesus loves you.
I'm sure that if he can, he does. I definitely respect Jesus for his ideals and morals, even if not for his supposed divinity.
At 5/19/11 01:27 AM, Head-Full-Of-Acid wrote:
It's a shame these kind of ideologies often seem to be disregarded (as people seem to base their actions out of self interest as opposed to the betterment of society), but I suppose that's human nature.
Thanks for the response, man! It's an interesting assessment that you have, there. I think the reason that people often instinctively turn away from ideas like this is for reasons ranging between self-interest (as you said), ignorance, and lack of self-awareness. I do hope though, that there is still a large enough people out there who would find this idea worth reading and/or discussing. I'd hate to think that Philosophy was really that much near death.
At 5/19/11 01:40 AM, Bacchanalian wrote:
You seem to be personifying both existence and individuality
I respectfully recommend you read the article a bit more carefully.
In Pantheism, God is the Universe, but it can be viewed as either sentient or non-sentient. In Physiomonistic Pantheism, the Universe is not considered sentient, and instead creates/changes as a natural function as opposed to an omnipotent consciousness. So no, the point is that I'm not personifying Existence.
What I see is a series of word games whereby you profess theists and the spiritual to be mistaken, and then go on to express equivalent thoughts/feelings but with less explicitly spiritual terminology.
It would be redundant to create a theory or belief without some sort of support. What you see as 'word games' is just me drawing parallels to commonly identifiable concepts, and then addressing them as they would apply to my presented way of thought.
Nonetheless, I respect the manner in which you responded. Let me know if you have any other thoughts or questions!