13 Things That Do Not Make Sense

[BigVrunga]

13 things that do not make sense - space - 19 March 2005 - New Scientist Space

 

[anabolicrhino]

I love stuff like this because it makes me think....

I realize that what is presented as fact in the schools or media outlets are just pieces of facts that seem to make sense to someone.

Once you examine any given fact or discipline of thought, you uncover that what is considered fact is really just the consensus
of the observers and the observed facts....in other words its only believable if you can get someone to agree with you that it is a fact,...science is basically a popularity contest...which proves something Homer Simpson said,"... there is nothing more important then popularity"

 

[yeahright]

Fun stuff.

 

[BodyWizard]

Thanks for the link - that's some fascinating stuff...

 

[kwyckemynd00]

Good stuff.

 

[Chemist2234]

Very interesting stuff....The worst part is that we prolly wont ever hear the answers to any of these questions, we will be dead and gone before they ever get answered.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

Depressing...don't remind me. I like to live in my beautiful little imaginary world where all questions of today will be answered tomorrow and where I'll be flying around like the Jetsons in a house on Mars before I'm 40. :sad:

 

[Chemist2234]

I know, it is quite sad. lets not think about it anymore:think:

 

[DmitryWI]

Hmm, interesting stuff for sure...

 

[Pirate Grim]

science lost me at the boob.

Once science said, that a tit or a womans boob is nothing more than just that, it lost me. evolution is also a hoax because why arent monkeys giving birth to human babies. fact is we dont know and were not going to ever know. only the Master knows. were like ants in the cosmos wondering and looking to the smart ants for answers. funny thing is smart ants cant create anything aout of nothing not even a blade of grass. Only the infinite almighty master of all realms knows the truth. well he is the truth. Christ and GOD.
ENOUGH said lol

 

[kwyckemynd00]

You made me "lol", regardless of the fact you may actually be serious and I can't tell

 

[anabolicrhino]

Once science said, that a tit or a womans boob is nothing more than just that, it lost me. evolution is also a hoax because why arent monkeys giving birth to human babies. fact is we dont know and were not going to ever know. only the Master knows. were like ants in the cosmos wondering and looking to the smart ants for answers. funny thing is smart ants cant create anything aout of nothing not even a blade of grass. Only the infinite almighty master of all realms knows the truth. well he is the truth. Christ and GOD.
ENOUGH said lol

"Why do men have nipples?

It is simply because men and women are stamped out of the same template. Women are not born with breasts, they develop with the onset of hormones during puberty. This can happen to men, just visit the post cycle therapy section of this board for some graphic examples!

Evolutionary theory is based on dominate traits not inter-uterus
species morphs. Monkeys do not have human babies, but some humans have babies born with "tails"!

Christ and evolution are different parts of the same hoax

There is only infinite truth and everything else is an illusion !

 

[Ziricote]

Compelling stuff, gotta say though I'm a tad disappointed that "Women" didn't make an appearance on the list.

 

[Chemist2234]

"Why do men have nipples?

It is simply because men and women are stamped out of the same template. Women are not born with breasts, they develop with the onset of hormones during puberty. This can happen to men, just visit the post cycle therapy section of this board for some graphic examples!

Evolutionary theory is based on dominate traits not inter-uterus
species morphs. Monkeys do not have human babies, but some humans have babies born with "tails"!

Christ and evolution are different parts of the same hoax

There is only infinite truth and everything else is an illusion !

In fetal development, the fetus actually has a tail, as well as webed fingers and toes. Also, everyone starts developing as a women. The male fetus developed ovaries, only once the presence of testosterone is detected do they start to develop testicles.

 

[BigVrunga]

It's all good gentlemen - the universe is just a big illusion anyway:

The Universe as a Hologram

 

[anabolicrhino]

It's all good gentlemen - the universe is just a big illusion anyway:

The Universe as a Hologram

Well, I did not want to just come out and say it but, yeah!

Talbolt's book is excellent you may also want to check out;

Amazon.com: The Holotropic Mind: The Three Levels of Human Consciousness and How They Shape Our Lives: Books: Stanislav Grof,Hal Zina Bennett


Amazon.com: Infinite Love Is the Only Truth: Everything Else Is Illusion: Books: David Icke,Icke David,Neil Hague

 

[CNizz]

very interesting clip, incase anyone hasnt seen it check out "What the F Do We Know?" as well on DVD, it will make you reconsider a looot of things

 

[Pirate Grim]

Salvation

Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the light.
Ask him into your heart today.

 

[Ribo68]

Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the light.
Ask him into your heart today.

The more science tries to discredit the Bible, the more it simply proves it. I don't know about you, but I'm positive I didn't come from cockroaches. Evolution says ALL that we see
originated from the same cell. (nevermind where THAT cell came from) Cockroaches are one of the oldest insects on the planet. They have not and are not evolving into butterflys
or rabbits or humans. Science knows that all forms of life originate with light. In fact, recent studies have shown that
the smallest fragment of the human cell is a light particle. Imagine that. We've completed the circle. The Bible has always maintained , "God is light.." All life comes from light, or God. Anyone TRULY searching for the truth will find it in the
ever-living, unchanging Word of God. He loves you so much
more than you could ever know. But He has given you a choice. Life or
death. Choose this day which you will serve. Life, or Christ. Death, or
the ways of this world and its beliefs. One thing EVERY human being
has in common is death. Where you go after that is a decision you can and should make today. It will cost you something to follow Christ but it is small in comparison to what you will gain!
Romans 3:10, 6:23, 10:9-10.

 

[anabolicrhino]

The more science tries to discredit the Bible, the more it simply proves it. I don't know about you, but I'm positive I didn't come from cockroaches. Evolution says ALL that we see
originated from the same cell. (nevermind where THAT cell came from) Cockroaches are one of the oldest insects on the planet. They have not and are not evolving into butterflys
or rabbits or humans. Science knows that all forms of life originate with light. In fact, recent studies have shown that
the smallest fragment of the human cell is a light particle. Imagine that. We've completed the circle. The Bible has always maintained , "God is light.." All life comes from light, or God. Anyone TRULY searching for the truth will find it in the
ever-living, unchanging Word of God. He loves you so much
more than you could ever know.

The bible is based on the truth. However it has been mistranslated and misinterpreted by men. some of the confusion is due to ignorance but most is due to corruption.

It would be wise to actually read it and make your own interpretation.

Just keep in mind that the bible was written by men who were interpreting the truth as it made sense to them.

Happy Easter !

Gut Yom Tov !

 

[Chemist2234]

The more science tries to discredit the Bible, the more it simply proves it. I don't know about you, but I'm positive I didn't come from cockroaches. Evolution says ALL that we see
originated from the same cell. (nevermind where THAT cell came from) Cockroaches are one of the oldest insects on the planet. They have not and are not evolving into butterflys
or rabbits or humans. Science knows that all forms of life originate with light. In fact, recent studies have shown that
the smallest fragment of the human cell is a light particle. Imagine that. We've completed the circle. The Bible has always maintained , "God is light.." All life comes from light, or God. Anyone TRULY searching for the truth will find it in the
ever-living, unchanging Word of God. He loves you so much
more than you could ever know. But He has given you a choice. Life or
death. Choose this day which you will serve. Life, or Christ. Death, or
the ways of this world and its beliefs. One thing EVERY human being
has in common is death. Where you go after that is a decision you can and should make today. It will cost you something to follow Christ but it is small in comparison to what you will gain!
Romans 3:10, 6:23, 10:9-10.

You Obviously haven't had any education in quantum mechanics. light acts as waves and particles, you cant say the smallest fragment is light because that light wave also acts as a particle. I dont know what your trying to get at here....???

 

[anabolicrhino]

You Obviously haven't had any education in quantum mechanics. light acts as waves and particles, you cant say the smallest fragment is light because that light wave also acts as a particle. I dont know what your trying to get at here....???

There are theories that suggest that the Bible is referring to quantum indeterminate behavior when speaking of god being from the light.

Quantum theories also suggest that the state of energy or matter is based upon the perception of the observer(string theory)

Membrane theory furthers the assertion that all matter/energy is the same and the concept of separation or space is an illusion of the observer who uses the space/time concept to create the world around him to the best of his understanding.

We are all one consciousness experiencing reality subjectively

or

"We are the imagination of ourselves" - Bill Hicks

 

[BigVrunga]

There are theories that suggest that the Bible is referring to quantum indeterminate behavior when speaking of god being from the light.

Quantum theories also suggest that the state of energy or matter is based upon the perception of the observer(string theory)

Membrane theory furthers the assertion that all matter/energy is the same and the concept of separation or space is an illusion of the observer who uses the space/time concept to create the world around him to the best of his understanding.

We are all one consciousness experiencing reality subjectively

or

"We are the imagination of ourselves" - Bill Hicks

+1

The more science tries to discredit the Bible, the more it simply proves it. I don't know about you, but I'm positive I didn't come from cockroaches. Evolution says ALL that we see
originated from the same cell. (nevermind where THAT cell came from) Cockroaches are one of the oldest insects on the planet. They have not and are not evolving into butterflys
or rabbits or humans. Science knows that all forms of life originate with light. In fact, recent studies have shown that
the smallest fragment of the human cell is a light particle. Imagine that. We've completed the circle. The Bible has always maintained , "God is light.." All life comes from light, or God. Anyone TRULY searching for the truth will find it in the
ever-living, unchanging Word of God. He loves you so much
more than you could ever know. But He has given you a choice. Life or
death. Choose this day which you will serve. Life, or Christ. Death, or
the ways of this world and its beliefs. One thing EVERY human being
has in common is death. Where you go after that is a decision you can and should make today. It will cost you something to follow Christ but it is small in comparison to what you will gain!
Romans 3:10, 6:23, 10:9-10.

I respect your conviction bro but that really doesnt make any sense. Evolution doesnt say that we all came from the same cell, read this:

Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm not religious, but I dont see how seeing the scientific sense behind evolution challenges anyone's belief in god. If your god made everything, and is everything, and we're all part of that god - then evolution makes perfect sense.

I've read the bible, and like anabolicrhino mentioned above - I think that your religious text speaks of things that are far deeper than our physical reality. Denouncing evolution is just men trying to make an excuse from being exclusive from everything else in the universe - and we're not. We're part of our physical reality as much as our consciousness is part of something that is far more profound.

BV

 

[CRUNCH]

The more science tries to discredit the Bible, the more it simply proves it. I don't know about you, but I'm positive I didn't come from cockroaches. Evolution says ALL that we see
originated from the same cell. (nevermind where THAT cell came from) Cockroaches are one of the oldest insects on the planet. They have not and are not evolving into butterflys
or rabbits or humans. Science knows that all forms of life originate with light. In fact, recent studies have shown that
the smallest fragment of the human cell is a light particle. Imagine that. We've completed the circle. The Bible has always maintained , "God is light.." All life comes from light, or God. Anyone TRULY searching for the truth will find it in the
ever-living, unchanging Word of God. He loves you so much
more than you could ever know. But He has given you a choice. Life or
death. Choose this day which you will serve. Life, or Christ. Death, or
the ways of this world and its beliefs. One thing EVERY human being
has in common is death. Where you go after that is a decision you can and should make today. It will cost you something to follow Christ but it is small in comparison to what you will gain!
Romans 3:10, 6:23, 10:9-10.

Just curious...do you believe the Earth is 10,000 years old (or less)?

 

[Chemist2234]

+1



I respect your conviction bro but that really doesnt make any sense. Evolution doesnt say that we all came from the same cell, read this:

Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm not religious, but I dont see how seeing the scientific sense behind evolution challenges anyone's belief in god. If your god made everything, and is everything, and we're all part of that god - then evolution makes perfect sense.

I've read the bible, and like anabolicrhino mentioned above - I think that your religious text speaks of things that are far deeper than our physical reality. Denouncing evolution is just men trying to make an excuse from being exclusive from everything else in the universe - and we're not. We're part of our physical reality as much as our consciousness is part of something that is far more profound.

BV

Couldnt have said it any better. reps to you:head:

 

[Chemist2234]

You don't either have to believe in god or evolution, you can have both. Some hardcore Christians may see it the other way but i think that is kinda retarded. I know lots of people that a very devout Christians and believe that evolution is a real thing.

 

[Ribo68]

You all seemed to have missed the statement I typed that said science does not discredit the Bible, but simply proves it.
This to me means that they aren't at odds. "Unbelieving" scientists try to use their discoveries to steer people away from faith in God. "Believing" scientists use their discoveries to
point people to the awesome power of God. Simply "reading"
the Bible like you read a newspaper will not give you an understanding of it. Knowledge and wisdom are two different things. I had knowledge of God long before I had the wisdom to allow Him to be the "Lord of my life." All the knowledge in the world won't help a bit when you stand guilty before your Creator with no excuse for why you chose to not answer when He called to your heart. Only the blood of Christ can get you the "not guilty" verdict. And if I'm wrong, so what. I'll simlpy end up as fertilizer and worm food. But if I'm right, I'll spend eternity with the One who gave His life for me. (AND YOU!) May the Lord open the eyes of your hearts.

 

[Chemist2234]

wow......If what way does science prove the bible??? I'm lost here. You can believe whatever you want, I'm not criticizing your beliefs. I could care less about what you believe in, I just don't understand your remark.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

My big pet peeve here is the whole "evolving 'from'" thing.

People...we didn't evolve "from" monkeys. We share (closely) a common ancestor with many primates. We evolved "with / alongside" monkeys from a common ancestor.

 

[anabolicrhino]

All the knowledge in the world won't help a bit when you stand guilty before your Creator with no excuse for why you chose to not answer when He called to your heart. Only the blood of Christ can get you the "not guilty" verdict.

Why are guilty? What did you do ??

And if I'm wrong, so what. I'll simlpy end up as fertilizer and worm food.

So, the choices are guilty before a judgmental god or a meaningless existence ?



But if I'm right, I'll spend eternity with the One who gave His life for me. (AND YOU!)

What if your right about the judgmental god, but wrong about the not guilty verdict?

May the Lord open the eyes of your hearts.

We are all one with god, some people just forget!

Remember?

 

[Mulletsoldier]

My big pet peeve here is the whole "evolving 'from'" thing.

People...we didn't evolve "from" monkeys. We share (closely) a common ancestor with many primates. We evolved "with / alongside" monkeys from a common ancestor.

Bizingo brah!

The common notion of, or I should say belief in, linear-development is a peeve of mine as well; if one is to envision our evolution, it is not a set of causal point mutations stemming from one cell, all the way up to us. It just isn't.

To the comment on "What The F@&k Do We Know?", that movie was resoundly discredited by many of the established quantum physicists who were in it. No legitimate theorist makes any attempt at applying quantum-field theories to large matter systems, or above all, consciousness (which is what that movie tried to do, correlating the quantum concept of entanglement, with the inter-subjectivity of human consciousness).

 

[BigVrunga]

You all seemed to have missed the statement I typed that said science does not discredit the Bible, but simply proves it.
This to me means that they aren't at odds. "Unbelieving" scientists try to use their discoveries to steer people away from faith in God.

Since when is it the goal of a scientist to steer people away from God? A scientist seeks to explain the unexplainable through empirical evidence and well constructed theory. That in no way proves or disproves God...in fact Id wager many scientists have their own faith as well.

The problem with fundamentalist beliefs of any religion, is that you vehemently deny anything that contests what you believe. And you believe the words that were written and told to you by other men - men who claim to know what God thinks. And that's not just wrong its downright frightening.

A scientist devoting his or her life to the study of the unknown, trying to learn how the universe works - they are trying to discover the truth. And that truth very well may lead to a God of some sort - who knows!

They're seeking whats beyond the realm of human knowledge. A fundamentalist viewpoint is believing what men have recorded in a book that is based on a religion - and religion is a construct of man.

Sure, maybe your belief is the right one, but Id rather keep my mind open.

BV

 

[Chemist2234]

Since when is it the goal of a scientist to steer people away from God? A scientist seeks to explain the unexplainable through empirical evidence and well constructed theory. That in no way proves or disproves God...in fact Id wager many scientists have their own faith as well.

The problem with fundamentalist beliefs of any religion, is that you vehemently deny anything that contests what you believe. And you believe the words that were written and told to you by other men - men who claim to know what God thinks. And that's not just wrong its downright frightening.

A scientist devoting his or her life to the study of the unknown, trying to learn how the universe works - they are trying to discover the truth. And that truth very well may lead to a God of some sort - who knows!

They're seeking whats beyond the realm of human knowledge. A fundamentalist viewpoint is believing what men have recorded in a book that is based on a religion - and religion is a construct of man.

Sure, maybe your belief is the right one, but Id rather keep my mind open.

BV

Your my hero:box:

 

[anabolicrhino]

Bizingo brah!

To the comment on "What The F@&k Do We Know?", that movie was resoundly discredited by many of the established quantum physicists who were in it. No legitimate theorist makes any attempt at applying quantum-field theories to large matter systems, or above all, consciousness (which is what that movie tried to do, correlating the quantum concept of entanglement, with the inter-subjectivity of human consciousness).

There is an earlier film based on a book by Columbia University physics professor Brian Greene Amazon.com: NOVA - The Elegant Universe: DVD: Maria Spiropulu,Joseph Lykken,Edward Witten,Cumrun Vafa,Steven Weinberg,Amanda Peet (II),Michael Duff (III),Brian Greene,Michael B. Green,Leonard Susskind,Walter Lewin,Gabriele Veneziano,John Schwarz (II)

The NOVA film does a good job explaining the two different physical universal theries- Newtonian / Einstein, Energy/Matter in the time/space continuum which applies to larger bodies(planets, universes)

Quantum theories(randomness) have never been disapproved at a sub atomic level, the paradox that exist is if all things can be broken down to a sub atomic level, why then are the laws of each universe different based upon the actual mass of the object in question.

The only force that is consistent in both theories is gravity
Gravity is the most abundant force in the universe and also the weakest. It can be easily defeated by a small child who jumps in the air.

So, it seems some what odd that the human observer can observe two distinct universal laws one based on things that are larger than humans and one based of things that are smaller

Especially considering that humans can be broken down to a sub atomic level...

So maybe it is the human mind which both holds the two universes together and prevents a comprehensive universal theory on a conscious level.

either way its fun to think about!

 

[Chemist2234]

There is an earlier film based on a book by Columbia University physics professor Brian Greene Amazon.com: NOVA - The Elegant Universe: DVD: Maria Spiropulu,Joseph Lykken,Edward Witten,Cumrun Vafa,Steven Weinberg,Amanda Peet (II),Michael Duff (III),Brian Greene,Michael B. Green,Leonard Susskind,Walter Lewin,Gabriele Veneziano,John Schwarz (II)

The NOVA film does a good job explaining the two different physical universal theries- Newtonian / Einstein, Energy/Matter in the time/space continuum which applies to larger bodies(planets, universes)

Quantum theories(randomness) have never been disapproved at a sub atomic level, the paradox that exist is if all things can be broken down to a sub atomic level, why then are the laws of each universe different based upon the actual mass of the object in question.

The only force that is consistent in both theories is gravity
Gravity is the most abundant force in the universe and also the weakest. It can be easily defeated by a small child who jumps in the air.

So, it seems some what odd that the human observer can observe two distinct universal laws one based on things that are larger than humans and one based of things that are smaller

Especially considering that humans can be broken down to a sub atomic level...

So maybe it is the human mind which both holds the two universes together and prevents a comprehensive universal theory on a conscious level.

either way its fun to think about!

Thats deep....

 

[Mulletsoldier]

The NOVA film does a good job explaining the two different physical universal theries- Newtonian / Einstein, Energy/Matter in the time/space continuum which applies to larger bodies(planets, universes)

Quantum theories(randomness) have never been disapproved at a sub atomic level, the paradox that exist is if all things can be broken down to a sub atomic level, why then are the laws of each universe different based upon the actual mass of the object in question.

The only force that is consistent in both theories is gravity
Gravity is the most abundant force in the universe and also the weakest. It can be easily defeated by a small child who jumps in the air.

So, it seems some what odd that the human observer can observe two distinct universal laws one based on things that are larger than humans and one based of things that are smaller

Especially considering that humans can be broken down to a sub atomic level...

So maybe it is the human mind which both holds the two universes together and prevents a comprehensive universal theory on a conscious level.

either way its fun to think about!

Where you and I would disagree is in the existence of, or moreover, accesibility to universal and distinct laws; whether they be social, or scientific in content.

While I am not adept enough to argue quantum field theory, I am not in the belief that these two systems must be mutually exclusive based on, as you said, the mass of the body in question. Nor do I feel that, in the near future at least, science will elucidate a comprehensive theory of 'everything' so to speak (as such a theory would link the two systems together).

The quam I was alluding to, is the attempt the movie made at proving the existence of moral abstracts based on the physics of quantum theory;while they did give, in my opinion, a thorough overview of the theory, they then proceeded to imply that humans behave the same way on a metaphysical level (the basketball scene, for example, while pointing out the different theories based on the mass of the object in question, then proceeded to imply that humans were entangled).

In my opinion, quantum theory should not be extrapolated to the social discourse of humans.

In response to:

So maybe it is the human mind which both holds the two universes together and prevents a comprehensive universal theory on a conscious level

I would agree with you at the 'end' so to speak, though my means would be much more Foucauldian in nature, and I am assuming you were implying a metaphysical bond of consciousness. Once again, I don't agree because of the implication of universiality; in this instance the human psyche being the cohesive mechanism through which these two universes are mediated. While I do feel that we are such a force, I feel it is through socially tangible discourse in the form of institutions, language, etc., and not in any metaphysical sense.

 

[BigVrunga]

Sing me a song about the Teleoceras,
Ancient Hippo Like Grazer From The Past
Sing me a song about the Teleoceras
Big fat rhino who fed on grass.

 

[kwyckemynd00]

I would agree with you at the 'end' so to speak, though my means would be much more Foucauldian in nature

I had to 'LoL' at that (Foucald was an outspoken homosexual...yes, I know...immature )

 

[Chemist2234]

lol to both of you

 

[Mulletsoldier]

I had to 'LoL' at that (Foucald was an outspoken homosexual...yes, I know...immature )

Bah! I leave it to you kwyck, you ****er!

:duel:

On a serious note though, History of Sexuality is an amazing book insofar as revealing [or attempting to reveal, at least question] the dominant discourses through which sexuality becomes coherent.

 

[BigVrunga]

In my opinion, quantum theory should not be extrapolated to the social discourse of humans.

I dont think so either. I think that social behavior is a product of this physical realtiy. Our consciousness may be a window into some theoretical meta-verse, but that's at a much deeper layer than that which makes up human behavior.

Which is kind of scary, if you think about it. When you start thinking about the death of our physical form - what happens to the conscious mind? Does it just dissipate, like software in RAM when a computer gets shut off? Does its energy somehow return to this hyperdimensional multiverse, only to protrude again into this reality? Do we retain any semblance of our personality?

BV

 

[Mulletsoldier]

I dont think so either. I think that social behavior is a product of this physical realtiy. Our consciousness may be a window into some theoretical meta-verse, but that's at a much deeper layer than that which makes up human behavior.

Which is kind of scary, if you think about it. When you start thinking about the death of our physical form - what happens to the conscious mind? Does it just dissipate, like software in RAM when a computer gets shut off? Does its energy somehow return to this hyperdimensional multiverse, only to protrude again into this reality? Do we retain any semblance of our personality?

BV

I often consider stuff like this as well. Though, fittingly, I tend to once again gravitate more towards questioning the individuals, mechanisms, and discourses through which the concept of an afterlife [or divinity, i.e., god or gods] become truth in our society, as opposed to pondering the existence of said divinity or afterlife itself.

 

[anabolicrhino]

Sing me a song about the Teleoceras,
Ancient Hippo Like Grazer From The Past
Sing me a song about the Teleoceras
Big fat rhino who fed on grass.

Hello Mr Teleoceras, at last we meet, the circle has been completed!

My search for a new avatar is over!

 

[anabolicrhino]

Where you and I would disagree is in the existence of, or moreover, accesibility to universal and distinct laws; whether they be social, or scientific in content.

While I am not adept enough to argue quantum field theory, I am not in the belief that these two systems must be mutually exclusive based on, as you said, the mass of the body in question. Nor do I feel that, in the near future at least, science will elucidate a comprehensive theory of 'everything' so to speak (as such a theory would link the two systems together).

The quam I was alluding to, is the attempt the movie made at proving the existence of moral abstracts based on the physics of quantum theory;while they did give, in my opinion, a thorough overview of the theory, they then proceeded to imply that humans behave the same way on a metaphysical level (the basketball scene, for example, while pointing out the different theories based on the mass of the object in question, then proceeded to imply that humans were entangled).

In my opinion, quantum theory should not be extrapolated to the social discourse of humans.

In response to:



I would agree with you at the 'end' so to speak, though my means would be much more Foucauldian in nature, and I am assuming you were implying a metaphysical bond of consciousness. Once again, I don't agree because of the implication of universiality; in this instance the human psyche being the cohesive mechanism through which these two universes are mediated. While I do feel that we are such a force, I feel it is through socially tangible discourse in the form of institutions, language, etc., and not in any metaphysical sense.

Ultimately the biggest question from "Down the Rabbit Hole" was is Marlee Matlin do-able?

discounting the mirror and thigh scene of course!

 

[Mulletsoldier]

Ultimately the biggest question from "Down the Rabbit Hole" was is Marlee Matlin do-able?

discounting the mirror and thigh scene of course!

I don't think that's something that can ever be answered.

 

[BigVrunga]

I often consider stuff like this as well. Though, fittingly, I tend to once again gravitate more towards questioning the individuals, mechanisms, and discourses through which the concept of an afterlife [or divinity, i.e., god or gods] become truth in our society, as opposed to pondering the existence of said divinity or afterlife itself.

Interesing how that pursuit can have many facets Perhaps there is some buried notion in our 'universal mind' that inevitably causes us to ask ourselves that question - and curiosity of human nature has provided the catalyst that developed religion and science in an effort to find truth in the unknown.

Ive read some essays that claim that contact with certain plant and fungi species may have been the initial seed millenia ago that 'woke up' our minds to the fact that there is something much deeper than our own reality.

BV

 

[Mulletsoldier]

Interesing how that pursuit can have many facets Perhaps there is some buried notion in our 'universal mind' that inevitably causes us to ask ourselves that question - and curiosity of human nature has provided the catalyst that developed religion and science in an effort to find truth in the unknown.

Ive read some essays that claim that contact with certain plant and fungi species may have been the initial seed millenia ago that 'woke up' our minds to the fact that there is something much deeper than our own reality. Then again, daydreaming can do that just as well

BV

Yeah, I mean it's pretty inevitable that question would arise as a function of needing to explain our existence. I mean, soon as communication was a facet of the human social condition, so to was spirituality. I think that the need to explain its existence is a common phenomena to consciousness. As Sartre said, with a God all of our actions are predeterminant, and essentially worthless, without one, we are completely alone and utterly responsible for both our existence and actions. Either way, we ****ed up!..

 

[yeahright]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to BigVrunga again.

 

[Mulletsoldier]

Pshh. The damn Rhino's always a crowd pleaser

 

[BigVrunga]

Teleoceras ain't no joke people.