User Controls
Posts by Obbe
-
2016-12-15 at 11:41 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by Sophie Well ok fair enough if you put it that way. But if the other person claims that his experience is the objective truth or says anything about actual reality i would have a problem with that.
I can agree with that, except I don't think "actual reality" is a purely objective thing, reality is actually both objective and subjective. That is why no matter how much we study and learn about bats you will never know what it is like to be a bat unless you are a bat. Someone experiencing reality differently than you doesn't make their experience not real, just subjectively different, and in my eyes spirituality is very subjective.
Post last edited by Open Your Mind at 2016-12-15T23:44:49.940918+00:00 -
2016-12-15 at 11:25 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelingsThat's OK, I was just wondering why you seem to think a spiritual perspective is wrong or a mistake and never got an answer from you.
Imagine you and someone both experienced X in a very similar way, you describe the experience in very similar ways, except this other persons also describes the experience as sexual and you do not. Are they wrong to do so? Is it a mistake? Are they interpreting something the wrong way? Are you? I don't think so. You each just experienced it a little differently than the other.
In my eyes that works for spiritual experiences as well. It's not wrong it's just a different perspective, unless you can explain why you think it's wrong. -
2016-12-15 at 10:59 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by Sophie tube
Hey, honestly, why did you stop replying to me man? -
2016-12-15 at 10:50 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelingsboob
-
2016-12-15 at 10:43 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelingsI guess that's a no.
-
2016-12-15 at 7:17 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by RisiR I love it when Obbe gets defensive over spirituality and then loses every point.. He's so open minded.
Nobody attacked you, faggot. No reason to go in defense mode over your hippy bullshit.
- RisiR, lifelong Psychonaut and author of the book "Go fuck yourself, Hippy"
Show me where I "lost every point". -
2016-12-15 at 2:26 AM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by mmQ Yes, a matter of perspective, and although spirituality can only be personally defined, I still beg the question what separates a personal experience from being spiritual or being, say, powerful. At what point does the effect of something decide you to declare that it has now crossed the threshold into a spiritual experience, and what makes that so?
I missed this post. I suppose that's the sort of question a person has to answer for themselves. -
2016-12-15 at 2:03 AM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by mmQ What does this mean? You become God? What does it to mean that connection you feel is God?
You don't become something you already are. We are all connected, we are all one being, in my eyes that is what God is, the beta and the Omega. -
2016-12-15 at 1:28 AM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by Sophie I am illustrating how viewing something from a different perspective can seem real but isn't an accurate description of reality. I think people believing in God are mistaken. They interpret the data that is available in a wrong way with their 'perspective'.
You said you have felt at one with the universe before, that not only are you a part of the universe but the universe is a part of you. When I experience that it feels deeply spiritual to me. Is it a mistake for me to feel that way? Is my perspective/interpretation wrong? How is it wrong? If I were to say that connection, that union with everything else is God in my eyes, is that a mistake? How is it a mistake? How can you say your perspective is the right or true perspective, and not merely a different perspective?
What is it like to be a bat? We can examine bats, dissect bats, figure out how they work, why they behave the way they do, but you will never know what it is like to be a bat unless you are a bat. We can try to scientifically describe what a bat is as objectively an accurately as possible, but that will never be the same as the "bat experience". When I feel like I am 'one with the universe' I could leave subjectivity at the door and try to describe this experience as objectively as possible, but that will never be the same as my deeply spiritual experience. When I say "the experience was spiritual" there is a subjective quality which I am trying to convey. Is it wrong to do that? How? Why?
-
2016-12-15 at 12:56 AM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by Sophie If i unbeknown to you rig your glasses(We'll pretend you wear glasses) to show every image upside down and i would show you an arrow that is pointing down, and you would say it is pointing up…
Does the real world get changed by your party spectacles or is your perception clouded by some other mechanism?
If you consider your thought processes and your perspective on life to be a part of the real world, then yeah, sure. I mean, viewing the world from a different perspective can be the difference between being depressed and being happy and content. It can alter a persons disposition, their choices and behavior and ultimately affect their entire life.
How is mistakenly viewing down as up a metaphor for viewing an experience as a spiritual experience? That implies a spiritual perspective is a mistake, do you believe that a spiritual perspective is a mistake? Why?
Originally posted by mmQ I would say that calling something spiritual is no different than calling something profound or awakening. Obviously the term spirituality has many different perspectives and is commonly used in a religious sense or with things like yoga and meditating and all that jazz. I wouldn't personally say that I've ever had a spiritual experience based on my aforementioned statement. I don't know what a spirit is or a soul is or if they exist, if you know what I mean.
I feel as though it's simply a label for an unordinary experience but doesn't by any means conclusively demonstrate that there in fact were 'spirits' involved. Growing up a Christian and well into my adult life I have certainly experienced moments with God that at the time I would've absolutely claimed them as spiritual under the preface of spirituality as it's associated with those religious beliefs. Looking back I can now see that I was creating the illusion of something that likely wasn't real. My experiences were real, of course, my feelings were real, but it was nothing more complex than experiencing those feelings and giving that experience a label.
Like I said, I don't think spirituality is well defined enough to where you could ever see someone else experiencing something and claim to know or point out that they are having a spiritual experience. You can only claim it for yourself and when you do so you are deciding that what you've gone through pertains to something unnatural. I can say that I'm having a spiritual experience right now while I type this but it doesn't mean anything and it doesn't make it true.
I don't know if that makes any sense. In short, spirituality is ill-defined and can't be conclusively demonstrated as an actual supernatural experience. If you want to call a moment of enlightenment a spiritual experience that makes sense but doesn't mean there is truly any spirituality going on even if you feel as though there is.
Turtles?
I'm pretty sure I agree with you on a lot of that, and I think that if spirituality doesn't mean anything to you there's no point in describing anything as spiritual. As I see it spirituality is personal and subjective, it's a matter of perspective and not everyone has to have a similar perspective on the world. That said, I do believe that whatever perspective you do have, can have a tremendous impact on your life. -
2016-12-14 at 11:25 PM UTC in Vegans.I want to hear what Lanny thinks about being a vegan. Why did Lanny become vegan?
-
2016-12-14 at 11:14 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by Sophie Not a different brain, simply a different interpretation of the sense data. Whether this interpretation is wrong or right is beyond the scope of this post.
Can things that are entirely subjective ever be objectively right or wrong? Can claims like "Red is the best colour," be right or wrong, or is it always just a matter or perspective, a way of viewing something? If it's just a matter of perspective, isn't spirituality also? -
2016-12-14 at 11:02 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by Sophie Stopped reading right there. Was it your mommy and daddy that taught you that? Or was it your priest? Did you also believe your priest when he said "body of Christ" as he rammed his cock into your little boy mouth?
Do you believe people who have spiritual experiences have significant differences in their brains that cause them to view the experiences as spiritual? Or is there another reason they are spiritual? -
2016-12-14 at 10:43 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by mmQ Isn't a spirit in and of itself supernatural? Does it not discredit spirituality to suggest that it can be attributed to feeling ANYTHING just so long as you're not lying about it? Again I ask why can two people experience the same feelings and one claim to have a spiritual awakening and the other claim to have simply had a really good time?
No, I don't agree a spirit is in and of itself supernatural. I don't believe that would discredit spirituality because as I see it spirituality is a deeply personal and subjective thing. As a metaphor, someone with an unusual fetish might find a regular everyday experience to be sexual. A person without that fetish would not agree that it is sexual. That does not mean that one of those people are wrong, or stupid, rather they just view that experience differently. Similarly people who view an experience as spiritual are not necessarily wrong or stupid, they just view it differently.
Mq, would you label the experiences you refer to as spiritual? Why or why not? Do you think people who have spiritual experiences have differences in their brain? -
2016-12-14 at 7:35 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by mmQ What's a genuine spiritual experience? What's a non genuine one? I have felt one with my surroundings on drugs and not in drugs, at church, at concerts, or alone. How could someone ever have a spiritual experience where they decide it was more than just a good experience and something supernatural? How can you know something is spiritual any more than you know that your dreams are natural despite the non-natural aspect of them?
I would say a non-genuine experience would be when someone is lying about it, they made it all up, are not being honest.
I don't believe anything is supernatural, I believe the natural world we live in is a spiritual world, but not everyone will see it that way. -
2016-12-14 at 7:16 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by Sophie Probably not. What's more, i wouldn't know what it would take to give me a spiritual experience. I've done my share of psychedelics and have never experienced such a thing. The closest i think i've felt was a deep connection to the Earth, all life and the Universe. But there is nothing magical about that, since we are connected through our shared history. I am a part of the Universe as much as the Universe is a part of me. And we know that almost all life on Earth has a common ancestor if we look back in time far enough, we are made of the chemicals and compounds that make up the Earth and the Earth is made up of chemicals and compounds that were created in Super Novas and nuclear fusion in stars. We are of the Earth and the Earth is of the stars and the stars are of the Universe.
I personally know of no deeper spiritual feeling then what that realization, that connection, brings to me. In your eyes there may be no magic in that but I think, as I have said before, that is a matter of perspective. I don't think it's stupid or wrong to see the world in different ways as you and I do. Do you believe people who have a genuine spiritual experience have a significantly different brain then you do, or is it something else? -
2016-12-14 at 4:52 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelings
Originally posted by Sophie I think it's funny how religious people treat atheism/science as a competing religion. I don't believe in God, not because anything proves God doesn't exist but the absence of any sort of indication or proof seems to suggest that there is no such thing as God. People who say: Prove God doesn't exist. Are retarded, logically speaking if the only evidence for God's existence is a lack of evidence for him not existing, then you haven't proven anything at all.
Furthermore, if i were to suppose God did in fact exist then i would say science, is the means by which we would understand God's design.
Post last edited by Sophie at 2016-12-14T15:36:25.416075+00:00
If you ever have a spiritual experience would it change your opinion despite lacking objective evidence, or would you believe you just had some sort of wire crossed in your brain? -
2016-12-13 at 7:16 PM UTC in Depersonalization/derealizationIt is interesting in a philosophical way.
-
2016-12-13 at 7:05 PM UTC in Life is more interesting without scientific labelingsWhat is a spirit anyway?
-
2016-12-13 at 12:27 PM UTC in The retarded thread: Fuck, §m£ÂgØL made one first edition
Originally posted by Malice I looked at over 20,000 pipes yesterday just to be certain I had made the optimal choice.
If you chose a tobacco pipe it was the wrong choice.
