Avatar
Please consider registering
guest
sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_TopicIcon
Science Without Bounds - the new religion?
June 1, 2006
2:22 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
101sp_Permalink sp_Print

bevdee,

{I wish I knew why, when once people became educated, could read that bible, and question its inconsistencies, they accepted the lame explanations? Was easier to just go along with it?}

I can tell you exactly why. I'm educated enough to realize that words don't always express exactly what the author intended; that words can be misheard, misread, and miscopied when being scribed; that it's impossible to perfectly translate from one language to another; that people make mistakes; etc.

I'm also wise enough to realize that human error, passions, weaknesses, etc. do not in themselves discredit whatever contains the error.

June 1, 2006
3:09 am
Avatar
sewunique
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
102sp_Permalink sp_Print

Guest, slow but sure you are learning!

Just simply look up the definition of the word sarcasm and you need not even ask Tez (unless you desire his validation; in which he gleefully gave).
A noun
1 sarcasm, irony, satire, caustic remark

witty language used to convey insults or scorn; "he used sarcasm to upset his opponent"; "irony is wasted on the stupid"; "Satire is a sort of glass, wherein beholders do generally discover everybody's face but their own"--Johathan Swift
h

Sarcasm is often used as an excuse at the telling of what one truly wishes to say, in a "humourous manner" that is simply a caustic remark. Hurtful and not very nice.

And so.....reading on I shall be behind the curtain.

Sew

June 1, 2006
9:00 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
103sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tez,

You were caustic to me with your comments, and openly insulting, when I tried to engage you in some honest dialouge. IMO, you have no grounds to be complaining about, seeking sympathy for, or insulting me for my sarcasm. What goes around comes around.

I don't plan to give you any more sarcasm, BTW, because I don't hold grudges.

Seeker

June 1, 2006
11:03 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
104sp_Permalink sp_Print

thanks sew

Hey seeker:

>> He also doesn't address individual's experiences with receiving revelational knowledge. < < This is NO such thing as anyone receiving revelations. Muslims, Hindus and people from other religions claim the SAME. Its only your BELIEF that your case of revelation is true while their's are all false. This BELIEF of yours doesnt have more sense or truth to it than my belief of Kittens living in my computer monitor. Can you prove anyone receiving individual revelations? You can earn $1 million dollars. link

If you cant prove it, then individual revelations dont exist, sorry. Simple as that.

Like many, you live in pre-historic times seeker. Religion will fade out because it doesnt have any rationale to it. Its not supported by facts. All it is is, is beliefs and stories. Its also absurdities like "Epilepsy caused by devils" and so much other such stuff in the Bible and other holy books. If you look at history, religion was always stronger. Its effects are becoming less and less.

Can I ask you, if your three children are as believing in faith as you are? All of them?

June 1, 2006
3:50 pm
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
105sp_Permalink sp_Print

Seeker,
Would you look at this thread title?and re-read this? How far in this book have you read to be able to discuss the ideas presented there?

"Tez
22-May-06
WD et. al.
WD, If you are still here, how would you like to visit http://www.adamford.com and then download a thought provoking book called "Science Without Bounds: A Synthesis of Science, Religion and Mysticism" written by Arthur D'Adamo? This book is free to download from this site with no strings attached.
It is a very balanced,unbiased and very readable book that proposes a way of extending the boundaries of science into that previously the exclusive domain of religion.
I would be very interested in your opinion of D'Adamo's views. The issues raised in it are interesting and make worthwhile discussion material. "

June 1, 2006
4:02 pm
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
106sp_Permalink sp_Print

TEZ -
I found the faith-loop question/answer!

From page 48
"In the long run, science demands proof before belief. In the short run, it tentatively accepts theoritacal constructs. Although such acceptance could be called a kind of faith, it radically differs from the kind of religious faith which is unbending, and if need be, fact-ignoring."

AND

From page 45
"Because science's theories are still incomplete, its understanding is still incomplete. " This is honest, and not like the cop-out answers I recieved and found unacceptable as a child.

OK! Science allows for mistakes, and for acquisition of more knowledge.

From page 50
"the fundamental difference lies in their different ways of knowing, not
in their fields of knowing. Any field of knowledge becomes a science
if it uses science's way of knowing. Therefore, any religion could
become a science - if it abandoned the revelational way of knowing
and used science's way, instead. Or science itself could examine
religious questions, questions of values and ethics, and ultimate
questions - just as it has examined many other fields of knowledge, by
using the scientific way of knowing. Beliefs that science's way of
knowing proves are scientific beliefs, no matter what the field of
knowledge. Therefore, in principle science's way of knowing can be
applied to ultimate questions. Any difficulty lies not in principle but
in practice. So, the question isn't "Can science's way of knowing be
applied to ultimate questions?" but rather "How can science's way of
knowing be applied to ultimate questions?" Subsequent chapters
attempt to answer that question. "

I am wondering which branch of science? The one that comes to my mind is Psychology, because it deals with the mind. Belief. Maybe that is not related to what is above though. Maybe that would be another study entirely?

But it is human nature to need to believe. We need answers, we need something to believe in, don't we?

And from page 58, "Science's openness to more and better truth is the opposite of religion's fixed, final and closed-minded world view."
And from my emotional standpoint, because I am way more emotional than analytical, I have always thought like this, especially watching and listening to my daddy. I have grieved for him, his world is closed off, because his mind is closed to so many things. I have a cousin who is paranoid schizophrenic, and my daddy's answer for that is - the devil -

Well you can see how slow I am going! It is really taking me a while, to absorb some of the content. Then I have to mull it over for a while, and read it again.

Tez you said "We all know that light is projected upon the screen in moving patterns. Yet when we become absorbed in the drama of the movie our emotions often erupt as though it was 'real'. Yet we 'know' (gnosis) that the movie is only a movie. In 'real' life we are not really what we think we are. The illusion of the 'self' playing a part in the drama of life is very strong and seductive. To be able to see the Ultimate Essence being projected upon the Screen of Life in the parts that we play out requires a special kind of 'knowing'. That way of knowing and seeing the basis for the interplay of 'patterns' of energy underlying matter requires the seeing through the illusions of 'selfhood'."

I am thinking of the perception of evil. I have never been concerned with demons and possession like some folks are. As a child, I was threatened with the "devil", and this was one of the things I shrugged off, whatever. This is a real fear for many people, but I simply refused to spend any time dwelling on it. So the devil or demons do not exist for me. I have no fear of this. I am not sure this is what you meant by that above.

Bevdee

June 1, 2006
4:20 pm
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
107sp_Permalink sp_Print

Seeker,

seekerw
1-Jun-06
"bevdee,
{I wish I knew why, when once people became educated, could read that bible, and question its inconsistencies, they accepted the lame explanations? Was easier to just go along with it?}
I can tell you exactly why. I'm educated enough to realize that words don't always express exactly what the author intended; that words can be misheard, misread, and miscopied when being scribed; that it's impossible to perfectly translate from one language to another; that people make mistakes; etc.
I'm also wise enough to realize that human error, passions, weaknesses, etc. do not in themselves discredit whatever contains the error. "

I wonder if this kind of forgiveness would be extended to the architect/builder of a bridge that collapsed and killed a bunch of people? Because of a discrepancy in the blueprints, a minor matter of translation? Would there be any accountability? Or just excuses made?

I meant this in a broad historical sense. The rest of that section of the post speculates fear,of persecution, horrible deaths, for not conforming to popular belief.

Please do not feel I am attacking you personally, Seekerw. I am not. I am not questioning you, so relax. But also, be aware that I am a daughter of a minister, stepdaughter of a minister, niece of a minister, and I could probably whoop you down in a game of Bible Jeapordy. So,I know you will not come up with any new material, in defending your choices.

Peace,

Bevdee

June 1, 2006
4:30 pm
Avatar
on my way
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 29, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
108sp_Permalink sp_Print

I can vouch for seeker and revelations...happens all the time through the Holy Spirit....not RELIGION. Seek is right, I don't even know him but I know that he is speaking the truth.

This thread has lost its sweet flavor, i don't think i will post here on this one anymore.

June 1, 2006
4:40 pm
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
109sp_Permalink sp_Print

on my way
31-May-06

Tez, since this thread has your attention and it would really be a waste of time to begin another thread about what i am about to ask, and since you live in Australia, you have to know the answer to this.

On Sunday I learned something new....that the water in the toilets in Australia run clockwise because it is below the equator. The water in the toliets in the states run counter-clockwise.....is this true?

SWEET

on my way
31-May-06

Tez you are being rude. You don't want anyone on this thread if it diagrees with you and your views...where is the sense in that? You are only able to respond to those who think the same way. You are only kind to those who agree with you...where is the truth in that?

on my way
31-May-06

Sure as shootin' got it backwards....without going into a huge explanaiton of Toilet Swirling 101 (a separate thread if anyone is interested)...Aussie goes counter clockwise and USA, USA, USA! goes clockwise.

peace ma' brother.

June 1, 2006
5:28 pm
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
110sp_Permalink sp_Print

bevdee,

An engineering professor once told me that water tends to spiral CCW in the N and CW in the S. However, the mechanics of the indivudual toilet far overpowers the natural tendency, so the toilet flushes in whatever direction its designer designed it to flush.

About the Bible, I've never heard of anybody dying over any of the relatively minor discrepancies in it. And if people persecute others, that's the choice of those people ; the Bible didn't make them do it. the bible counsels us to be peaceful.

I'd be delighted to engage you in further Bible discussion. I've been reading it almost every day for 25 years, and have done some intense study on it. I probably know it well enough to discuss with a minister.

I plan to open a thread with some of the minor discrepancies I've found in the Bible, and explain why I think they are nothing to be alarmed about. I don't know when I'll be able to do this.

take care,
Seeker

June 2, 2006
7:59 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests
111sp_Permalink sp_Print

guest_guest

On the 31-May-06 you said:

""if sarcasm is meant to intentionally hurt someone then it truly is the lowest form of wit."

So that means we shouldnt do sarcasm unless we wanna hurt the person! heh. Hmm."

Hurting someone is not the sole motivation for using sarcasm.

Your logic above is the same as that used if I were to say:

A cat has four legs so this means that everything that has four legs is a cat.

June 2, 2006
10:29 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests
112sp_Permalink sp_Print

bevdee

Your response of the 1-Jun-06 to me is, in my view, both very thoughtful and insightful.

In your response you wrote:

"... I am wondering which branch of science? The one that comes to my mind is Psychology, because it deals with the mind. Belief. Maybe that is not related to what is above though. Maybe that would be another study entirely?"

I think that the domain of the hypothetical 'Religious Science' would overlap many other the domains of many other branches of Science. That was the opinion of my uni psychology lecturer many years ago when I posited deep questions regarding the nature of the human condition.

I do hope no one misconstrues this statement of mine by thinking that I am inferring that the scientific way of knowing is the only way of knowing that has any value. Not at all.

I believe that I had an extremely deep and genuine mystical experience years ago that radically changed my life. It shifted my centre of my 'basis for knowing' from outside of myself to within. After it, in regard to spiritual matters I no longer needed to continually refer to external 'expert' sources when making judgments about what I did or did not believe.

After that experience, as a 'crap detector', the scientific way of knowing was integrated into my knowledge base together with my 'other' mystical way of knowing quite comfortably.

I guess that you can see why I find D'Adamo book so useful.

You wrote:

"But it is human nature to need to believe. We need answers, we need something to believe in, don't we?"

Speaking for myself, I sure as hell want answers that make sense out of both this world and my short but eventful life. But for me those answers have to be MY answers; not those of some external so-called authority imposing his/her 'second hand' gained knowledge on me in some controlling or ego-manipulating way. Otherwise I become inauthentic, a 'secondhand rose' as it were.:-)

The scientific way of knowing involves amongst other things logical theories, hypotheses, explanations and 'proof' or 'validation' by generalized experimental replication followed by statistical analyses. Whilst this doesn't guarantee the finding of absolute truth, it sure as hell increases the probability that the scientific way of knowing will lead in that direction that D'Adamo calls 'gnosis' rather than by using 'second hand' attained scriptural knowledge acquired in the first place by the revelational way of knowing.

My experience with Buddhism leads me to believe that it encompasses the scientific approach in so far as it heavily relies upon causes and conditions combining to produce the effects to explain what we see in our daily lives.

The Buddhist monks and nuns with whom I have come into contact have all insisted that I replicate for myself by practicing and 'seeing for myself' before I believe any of the Buddha's teachings. The Buddha himself even taught this.

You said:

"Well you can see how slow I am going! It is really taking me a while ... "

Take all the time you like and enjoy.

I keep in mind, as did D'Adamo himself as he wrote his book, of his own severe limitations combined with those of the language of the written word.

You also said:

"I am thinking of the perception of evil. ... ... So the devil or demons do not exist for me. I have no fear of this. I am not sure this is what you meant by that above."

No I wasn't referring to demonology, belief in Satan or any other demons.

When we see a 'tree' most of us humans, myself included, tend to think that the tree exists outside of ourselves EXACTLY as we see it. We create a mental object in our minds isolated from every other object and we label it 'a tree'.

In fact science tells us that the tree consists of various components, cambrial, soft wood, hardwood, sap you name it. Quantum physicists 'see' what particles have combine to form these components. They go further and 'dissect' these particles all the way down to 'energy' - the Essence of all sub-atomic particles held in common.

This Essence of all existence is, according to D'Adamo, the analogous equivalent of the projector's light in a movie theatre that builds the image we see on the movie screen.

Like the movie projector's light energy produces the movie, analogously speaking, the energy underpinning the subatomic particles is manipulated by moving, 'patterned' fields to produce atoms, molecules, tree components and ultimately a moving 'object'. As a result of radiant energy from the sun, photons, which themselves are energy are emitted from the atoms of the 'object'. These photons hit our eyes, our brain manipulates the resulting signals and forms an image in our visual cortex. Our brain processes this image and our mind forms moving image of an 'object' on its own screen.

We then interprete and evaluate this moving image, sound, smell, taste, or touch in our mind as being good or evil based upon our preconditioning. We decide that it is either good, neutral or bad (evil). The term 'bad' generally encompasses that which we believe is threatening our welfare or that of others. Whereas, generally speaking, what we see as being 'evil' is in my opinion that which we perceive as originating from malevolent intentions.

What intent the 'evil' causing 'source' actually has/had, is usually another mind's doing and is normally unknown to us. But our minds oftentimes create the illusion that we do know this intent in others. So we tend to 'react' rather than to 'proact'.

Thus, we choose our own interpretations of the intent. As the mystic poet William Blake pointed out, the mind is its own place, and in itself can create a heaven out of hell or a hell out of heaven.

Alternatively, the mind can see that it is indeed "its own place" AND it is both the 'director', 'stage manager' and the 'directed' in the drama that is being played out in itself. It can thus 'transcends' the knower, the knowing and the known.

John Wren Lewis experiences/ed that instant by instant every day of his life. See link at the end my posting to you of 31-May-06.

On page 361, D'Adamo says:

"when a knower
transcends the triad of knower, knowing, and known, when they
merge with the known, then only One remains. But does only the One
remain? Rather, aren't there two elements, knowing and the now
united knower/Known? A common answer to this objection is that
since God is One, God's self-knowledge is not different from God.
Thus, there are not two elements, but One. God and God's self-knowledge
are identical."

I question the use of the word "God" here. Though I know D'Adamo doesn't have a Personal God in mind, I would prefer that he had used the phrase, familiar to him, "Ultimate Ground of Being" or "Ultimate Essence".

We are getting into very deeper water here. I don't mind. But it is about now that all sorts of buttons start getting pushed in other readers that results in aggression towards me. I have certainly NOT got you in mind when I say this. I'll brave the onslaught - if it comes.

June 2, 2006
10:37 pm
Avatar
on my way
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 29, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
113sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tez,
I will refrain from any button pushing at this time. :0)

omw

June 2, 2006
10:39 pm
Avatar
sewunique
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
114sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tez

But what pleasure would be lost without the past encounters of some of those folks you engaged conversation in? *smile*

Sew

Okay, I'm otta here!

June 2, 2006
10:43 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
115sp_Permalink sp_Print

hi Tez

I wanna learn to look inside too. Anything I can do or would it be "am not ready :)) " ? I'm serious.

I'm not seeking spiritual help, I want my "center" to be strong. I know its gonna take time, whatever it is.

you wrote:

>> I believe that I had an extremely deep and genuine mystical experience years ago that radically changed my life. It shifted my centre of my 'basis for knowing' from outside of myself to within. After it, in regard to spiritual matters I no longer needed to continually refer to external 'expert' sources when making judgments about what I did or did not believe. < <

June 2, 2006
11:10 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
116sp_Permalink sp_Print

yea so i mean, I wanna know more, if you wanna tell, how you got that experience. I know it cant be inside any of those Cinammon Crunch cereal boxes.. ok just being silly here, but i wanna know more if possible.

June 3, 2006
10:34 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests
117sp_Permalink sp_Print

Guest_guest.

"I'm not seeking spiritual help, I want my "center" to be strong. I know its gonna take time, whatever it is."

Having a "strong center" depends largely upon your your world view and your concepts of who and/or what you are in relation to that world.

You said: "I'm not seeking spiritual help ...".

That is like a person who has run out of gas(petrol in Oz) on the highway saying to you,"I'm not seeking any help from you in getting some gas. I just want you to advise me on how to get my engine running - that's all." You would probably say to him or her: "Buddy - you are just not yet ready to drive a car. You need to learn a few things about your car first.".

I keep telling you that I don't think that you are ready because of your "world view and your concepts of who and/or what you are in relation to that world".

Whilst I'm far from being a saint, nor do I ever want to be by most peoples definitions of sainthood, I spent many years changing both my world view and self concepts with a lot of help from many "masters" - not all either human or supernatural - up until then.

Since I definitely had it, obviously I was finally "ready" to have that mystical experience - the only one that I have had as deep as that one.

Can I replicate it on demand today? No.

I think that I am ready for a "master's" instruction in this next stage towards "gnosis", but the "master" is obviously of a different opinion.

So I keep doing the footwork on my quest for "gnosis" the very thing that will "strengthen" my "center" to the point that death will be my friend not my enemy.

There are no pat answers that will short circuit your own personal journey.

I have provided two links; one to a book by D'Adamo and another to an article by John Wren Lewis. If you find them of no value then you are just "not yet ready" for their message.

You seem to take this statement as an insult. Why? I don't know. I surmise that you are interpreting this phrase to say that I am saying that you are in some way a lesser being than I am. That is not what I meant or intended.

Is a high school student a lesser person than you because he/she is "not yet ready" to go to work and earn a living? NO! They are at the stage they are at and you are at the stage you are at and that is all that there is to it.

What "master" you need at your stage, I know not. You need to seek out that "master" from all the resources at your disposal. If you did what I did it might not even work for you.

I've suggested that you try the Buddhist way as a 'short cut' to 'gnosis' but it did not seem to suit you. Because it wasn't what you expected you rejected it.

Well my friend you need to seek elsewhere until you find the "master" that suits the level 'where you are at'. You've been through the Islamic path and found out what is not for you. I doubt that you will fare any better in Christianity for the very same reasons.

I like Buddhism because it has a very rational, solid psychological basis for the Buddha's teachings. But I will eventually, upon the Buddha's best advice, eventually abandon even that.

You might like Joseph Krishnamurti's approach which has no God who is a Person underpinning his teachings. I got something from him as my "master" before moving on to the next level.

I don't expect you to understand what I am about to write but I will do so in order that the seed is planted so that when 'you are ready' it might blossom and grow. Here goes:

In order to have a life changing mystical experience you have to completely let go, albeit temporarily, of any clinging to the your view of a 'self' that you think is you - a self that you presently believe possesses all of your attributes, self-image etc and that is separate from all else, especially from the very Heart of the 'All' that 'Is'.

June 3, 2006
11:17 pm
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
118sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tez,
It is so nice to hear from you. I want to thank you for taking the time to help me understand parts of this book. Some are really hard for me to grasp. There is so much I want to read, and consider, but I know I mustn't try to do it all too quickly, There are no quick answers.

Tez, you said to me,
"Speaking for myself, I sure as hell want answers that make sense out of both this world and my short but eventful life. But for me those answers have to be MY answers; not those of some external so-called authority imposing his/her 'second hand' gained knowledge on me in some controlling or ego-manipulating way. Otherwise I become inauthentic, a 'secondhand rose' as it were.:-) "

I have always felt like this.
You wrote, "I question the use of the word "God" here. Though I know D'Adamo doesn't have a Personal God in mind, I would prefer that he had used the phrase, familiar to him, "Ultimate Ground of Being" or "Ultimate Essence". "

I don't use the word God, with a capitol G, because I am still not sure about that god. Or goddess. Yet. Still.

You said,
"I believe that I had an extremely deep and genuine mystical experience years ago that radically changed my life. It shifted my centre of my 'basis for knowing' from outside of myself to within. After it, in regard to spiritual matters I no longer needed to continually refer to external 'expert' sources when making judgments about what I did or did not believe. "
I have had no mystical experience. Just a slow turning, I guess, away from the convention, and the mental? patterns I have developed over the years. I have been dipping my toe in the water, trying to understand ego, and letting go of ego. I hit a real rough patch close to a year ago. Until then, I got my affirmation from external sources, my job, my friends, attention from men, material acquisition. I hit rock bottom, and all I had left was me, and 2 friends who helped me. Help always comes from the most unexpected sources. I had left a comfortable job, for a different one and started commuting into a much more competitive job area. I found out I was not one of the best in my field, just one of the "better" in the little town I had been working in. I was fired from the new job, because I wasn't good enough!! I got another one, but I knew if I didn't get better fast, I would get eaten alive. I stuck to it, endured sneers and insults quietly, listened, observed, and improved. This wasn't for feeding my ego, it was just for feeding my body. It had come down to survival. Before, I had had such confidence, if I were insulted, I would have walked out of a situation, cocky, and gotten away with it. Not so in the new job.

After being let go from the first new job, and finding the one I have now , I had no income, and had to wipe out my savings, then borrow money from my family. I got behind on all my bills. Even after I got the job I have now, I was not getting caught up quickly enough. I was getting close to being evicted from my duplex. A friend stepped in and made the offer of moving in with her, at a ridiculously low monthly rent. I took it, after raising every objection I could think of.

It felt like failure.

I have lost a lot of weight, due to the stress and necessity, spending less money on groceries, and I was getting more attention from men. I basked in it, because this was the only thing in my life that was making me feel worthwhile. I was so broke!!! I felt like shit!! All my stuff is in storage, and I am living in a place that I CANNOT DECORATE!!! I can not control my environment!! So, when a man looked at me, or came on to me, for a few minutes afterward, I felt great. Pretty juvenile, but there I was. I was needing that affirmation. From guys at the store or gas station!
When I realised what was going on, I started thinking about my ego, What stroking it needed. Just talkin about my ego here!! So, I listed the things that I needed to stroke my ego, and tried to figure out why. I asked myself if I did not have any of these things, what would I be? Is there any more substance to me than the money I make, car I drive, the job I have, the way my hair looks, and the attention I get from good-looking men?

I made another list of the things that I thought I needed to make me happy. Everything on my lists were from outside myself.

I asked myself, what is at my core? What if, at the very center of this core is only self-pity, blaming others for my mistakes, my stagnation?

Do I even have a core?

I think the answer to that has to be yes, or I would not have made it alive out of an abusive relationship 10 years ago, My will to survive was too stong.

I am working on being honest with myself. I am finding that self- honesty does not mandate that I constantly explain myself to others. That feels like self-justification. And it opens the door to people telling me their judgements of me, and I don't need that anymore.
I also find that being honest is hard to do after many years of self-deception, and sometimes? I feel like my heart and soul have been rubbed with sandpaper. Some days I feel raw.

It is so much easier not to think!!!

I have also found that the earth didn't tilt on its axis when I got less expensive haircuts, and started buying detergent at the dollar general. I am working on getting over myself.
I hope I haven't veered too far off the subject here.

I read the Dazzling Dark article. Thank you. I will have to go over it again, of course. I have to geat my own pc.

Till next time,

Bevdee

June 4, 2006
12:54 am
Avatar
sewunique
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
119sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tez,

That was a very sound and compassionate post above to Guest. I was able to profit from it as well. Nicely explained.

Sew

June 4, 2006
12:54 am
Avatar
sewunique
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
120sp_Permalink sp_Print

...back to reading in silence.

June 4, 2006
1:21 am
Avatar
sewunique
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
121sp_Permalink sp_Print

For you, Guest...

Just as a candle cannot burn without fire, men cannot live without a spiritual life.-- Buddha

Life is like riding a bicycle. You don't fall off unless you plan to stop peddling.-- Claude Pepper

Sew

June 4, 2006
1:30 am
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
122sp_Permalink sp_Print

Hey Sew?

I really love the way you stand up for what you believe. I admire the clarity you have, and I think you are a great defender of women! I have read in silence for a long time, too. You're pretty cool.

Bevdee

June 4, 2006
2:23 am
Avatar
glittered when he walked
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
123sp_Permalink sp_Print

I attempted a quick read on this book..call it skimming w/ targeted reading. For the record, this guy rambles too much.

He seems to be advocating applying scientific practices in examinaing certain mystical notions, well that's a start...certainly a lot better than Falwell telling me that Tinky winky and spongebob homopants are out to make us all gay. Science frequently considers origin of life, but I find it highly unlikely you can get to the point where you are proving the existence of God. He likens actuarial tables and time of fission to statistical analyses of mystical experiences...the differnce is the fission and acturial tables are based on unbiased observations of any atoms or people I would think...whereas tryng to lend statistical analyses to a third parties observations is dubious at best.

I might be way off base as I didn't digest his entire book and did targeted reading in cetain chapters and the conclusion (which BTW I found lacking). It's an intriguing idea, but it might be akin to concluding that there is no such thing as red or green because your test group was entirely red/green color blind. Additionally, he doesn't seem to address the idea of falsification. If we applied his suggestions could we conclude that God doesn't exist or that these mystical experiences are indeed false? His argument seems to be if over 50% of mystics report that God spoke to them as kermit the frog, then kermit the frog is God.

I may read more, but by trusting my gut reaction ( a very unscientific thing I guess) I'm skeptical that what he is arguing can be achieved.

June 4, 2006
2:24 am
Avatar
sewunique
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
124sp_Permalink sp_Print

Thanks, Bevdee,

Yes, I am a defender of women, the poorer, less fortunate and sometimes the underdog. What you surmise is quite true.

Oh dear, you have read some of my posts up here? At times it can be a struggle to be heard clearly!!!

Unfortunately, I feel best to read your and Tez' posts here and am not up to the long read nor have the background you both have shown for me to really share here.

Sorta fun just reading along for the ride, however!

Sew

June 4, 2006
2:34 am
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
125sp_Permalink sp_Print

Miss Sew,

I don't have the background, this is why reading this work is so slow going for me. Mind-stretching.

I read for the ride, too. Kinda like a La-ZBoy quarterback?

Forum Timezone: UTC -8
Most Users Ever Online: 247
Currently Online:
30
Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
onedaythiswillpass: 1134
zarathustra: 562
StronginHim77: 453
free: 433
2013ways: 431
curious64: 408
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 49
Members: 110922
Moderators: 5
Admins: 3
Forum Stats:
Groups: 8
Forums: 74
Topics: 38536
Posts: 714207
Newest Members:
Corties, patrickstayes, kevinkovalsky, izzy39, RoyFollman, kevin021
Moderators: arochaIB: 1, devadmin: 9, Tincho: 0, Donn Gruta: 0, Germain Palacios: 0
Administrators: admin: 21, ShiningLight: 572, emily430: 29

Copyright © 2019 MH Sub I, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy | Health Disclaimer