Zophar's Message Domain

Zophar's Message Domain (http://www.zophar.net/forums/index.php)
-   Talk of the Town (http://www.zophar.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The "afterlife" (http://www.zophar.net/forums/showthread.php?t=7943)

JadussD 10-29-2006 02:36 AM

The "afterlife"
 
This was going to be a reply to a post by shawn in another thread, but I figured it deserves its own thread, because its like, huge, man.

Anyways, here you go:

I think the biggest problem with the whole afterlife-or-no-afterlife debate is the fundamental assumptions in our language that place conditions on reality, as well as our frame of reference within reality. For instance, the word "afterlife" is a compound word, making it a conglomeration of two ideas, each with their own set of conditions and assumptions.

The assumptions which allow the word "after" to make sense are dependent on beliefs commonly held about time. It is the belief of most people that time is a linear progression of events, which inexorably moves in a direction which is commonly interpreted as "forward". It is generally considered impossible to change the direction, although according to the theory of relativity in the realm of ideas known as "physics", it is thought that it is altered by relative motion. It is not considered possible to change the direction of it.

Viewed from another angle, it could be said that everything happens "at once", although this too is dependent on the concept of time. However, accepting this limitation to view a different concept of time, one which would be closer to a spacial dimension which could be moved freely about in (rather than just forward in it), it could be said that an individual (defined as a unit of consciousness) could, in essence, choose to move forward in it. If, at some point, this consciousness unit forgets the properties of the universe he occupies, or has them deliberately erased from his memory using some means unknown, he may construct an inaccurate view of the universe in which "time" is something which only moves "forward". If this conception of "time" was perpetuated by those who surround him, and is communicated to him through "words" (defined as a conceptual paradigm which divides a perceived reality into "objects" and "concepts"), the individual who moves through "time" could easily be seen as living in a universe in which they live life limited by inaccurate concepts of the nature of their existence in which basic assumptions are made, although they appear perfectly reasonable to the lifeforms blinded by their collective ignorance.

For instance, a sentient being on Earth might believe that he is a form of "life". "unit" of life could be seen as a division between language-divided matter (physical objects) which contains certain characteristics and language-divided matter which does not. These characteristics are amorphous and difficult to define, but in short could be described as divisions of physical phenomena which have mechanisms for producing self-similar replicas of themselves, and the ability to absorb other divisions of physical phenomena as "food", which provides them with the "energy" they need for "survival", which is generally considered to be the continued existence of an individual life-form as something which can be described as such. All of these take a very anthropocentric view, in which humans make some unwarranted assumptions about their own consciousness and project them onto what they perceive.

For instance, humans make the assumption that before they existed, there was a "history", defined as events within time which came "before" the moment the human currently occupies. In this history, certain things have happened as a mechanism which leads in various ways to the present. All of these are based on the fundamental assumption that humans have not been deceived about the nature of events, or that there may be unlimited combinations of occurences which lead to the possible present, which could also be seen as largely amorphous, as the individual human only knows about what he perceives at the time, and does not know whether those things outside his perception occur in the manner they do when they are not being perceived. As such, it could be said that the past or present is learned or observed only by an entity which makes assumptions about it. One of these assumptions could be that what he observes is external to himself, and is governed by certain rules which he is not in control of. If the observer was a being who was aware that these rules are under his control, such as in the case of a supernatural deity, it could also be said that he may desire, for whatever reason, to blind himself to this ability, and to create the illusion of something "outside of himself". It could also be said that the concept of physical laws which govern the "universe" could be the result of ignorance, as it may be possible that the universe is simply a construct of entities with the ability to create reality who, for reasons unknown, may have entered into a state of being in which they have a concept of being separate entities, and of a reality in which they exist, but for the most part believe that it is external to themselves, and is governed by certain absolute truths, such as time, scientific laws, and the idea that one is going to "die".

If viewed this way, it could be said that the universe is actually the result of living entities in a state of ignorance. In this state of ignorance, they may have created a frame-work for creating a limited understanding of their existence through words, which could be seen as dividing a "whole" reality into individual "parts". By grouping such divisions that are seen as similar into "parts", such creatures could be seen as taking a range of the "whole" with infinite possibilities for variation and allow themselves to "simplify" reality into a "world of words". If the creature were to become dependent on this world of words he has created for understanding of his own creation, he could "forget" who he is, and rather than being the creator of said reality, start thinking in "words", which in a language with a concept of a separate "me" and "not me" causes the individual to become entangled in a sea of confusion, in which his sense of self is defined by what he learns with words taught by others with a limited understanding of things. In this way, reality could actually be "created" by the individual, and he would not be aware of his role in doing so. In this way, the individual could actually be caught in a web of self-deception, in which he is cut off from the part of himself who is creating that which he perceives. In this way, he might create a division between "life" (that which is more like his limited understanding of himself as a consciousness divided by its reliance on "words") and "death" (the state of something which appears to have once been like himself, but has ceased to be so). In this way, a consciousness may become "separated" from a more complex consciousness by a mechanism which is limited in its capacity for understanding (possibly represented to it as a "brain"). It could be then said that just as a consciousness forgot itself when it became "self-aware" (usually around the time it started to learn words), that when it "dies", it merely stops existing as a creature which is limited to words in its understanding of the nature of existence.

In other words, perhaps in dying, we stop being limited by words in our understanding of ourselves.
<P ID="signature"></P>

Porchmonkey 10-29-2006 03:17 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
I'm not sure about the afterlife, but I'm open to the possibility.

If there is a soul, it is more than likely some kind of energy. Perhaps similar to "dark energy" because it's not detectable by current equipment. Energy can never be destroyed, just redirected. Following this trail of logic something must happen to this engery after death. Now, I can't assume it has consciousness in and of itself because it simply energy, but maybe that energy moves into another vessel.

I suppose it is possibe for a soul to have consciousness, since consciousness is nonmaterial. So, I guess an afterlife is possible.

Of course, its entirely probable there is no soul at all. I guess if I die and retain somekind of consious form I'll for sure.
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 10-29-2006 05:19 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
Nothing happens when you die. No soul, no going to heaven, but definitely going to hell. The real hell though. Not the retarded firey torment place that morons think is where bad people go. Everyone goes to hell when they die.

Dont know what real hell is? Look it up.
<P ID="signature"></P>

SwampGas 10-29-2006 05:51 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
It IS energy...it's just of such a high frequency that we're not able to detect it.

Gd defines himself as always existing with no reference of time. The typical "soul" has no reference of time once separated from the body. Looking at the basics of physics, a photon of light is "energy", has no time, and can simultaneously exist in all places at once depending on your frame of reference.

So yes, it's energy.

<P ID="signature"><marquee direction=right scrollamount=10>http://www.zophar.net/personal/swampgas/hsrun.gif</marquee></P>

pipes 10-29-2006 06:00 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
What is after life? I say its when you rot and what ever is eating you you are now it and a pile of waste left over. Thats about as much life as it get after life. Want to know what its like? Think of your earliest memory. Now try to think before that. Its blank and nothing. Thats what death is like. Something what people call "real hell" or the lack of GOD.
<P ID="signature">The pipes clangor all the time!</P>

JadussD 10-29-2006 06:14 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> Nothing happens when you die.

The idea of "nothing" to me seems to rule out the ability for it to "happen". If nothing is characterized as something which does not exist, it must become something for it to "happen". In that sense, in the words of infamous occultist Aliester Crowley, "Nothing Is. Nothing becomes. Nothing is not." are equivilent statements which imply a mysterious progression toward "Something is". When "Nothing" happens, it is simply something happening which someone, due to the limits of their perception and cognition, has used a term called "nothing" as a "placeholder" for that which is not apparent to them.

> No soul, no going to heaven,
> but definitely going to hell.

No soul? What is a soul anyways? What if "physical matter" (I would opine, "word based matter") had components which were 1) Unobservable 2) Untranslatable to language, which is based on axioms which do not apply to its nature. 3) Only understandable or perceivable from the standpoint of one who has expanded his consciousness in a manner which is not known or understood by many others.

Doesn't saying the concept that something doesn't exist seem a little audacious? Could it be that something exists, but is of a nature which is indescribable, and only understandable through esoteric knowledge?

> The real hell though. Not the
> retarded firey torment place that morons think is where bad
> people go. Everyone goes to hell when they die.

If this "real hell" were to be seen as different from the "normal" hell, yet to form a concept of hell which is defined as something different from what is thought of the word, isn't this in effect redefining a word? Could it be that the concept of "hell" is subjective? For instance, there are people who are known to experience pain as a form of very intense pleasure, and seek it as a sort of sex-like release. If pain were to be pleasure to these people, would this person in "hell" actually be in "heaven"? What if, in the time spent in hell, a "pain-avoidant, normal" person grew to appreciate the pain which is in "hell", to find comfort in it? Could this possibly create an arbitrary division between "heaven" and "hell", when the division is actually subjective and would best be left up to the "suffer/enjoyer" of their supposed "fate"?

> Dont know what real hell is? Look it up.

I do believe that there is a problem here. If most people think that hell is a fiery torment place that they go to, won't the "definition" found when it is "looked up" reflect this perception?

<P ID="signature"></P>

Porchmonkey 10-29-2006 06:27 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
>Looking at the basics of physics,
> a photon of light is "energy", has no time, and can
> simultaneously exist in all places at once depending on your
> frame of reference.

That's insightful. Thanks for adding that SwampGas.

<P ID="signature"></P>

Porchmonkey 10-29-2006 06:28 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> Dont know what real hell is? Look it up.

Hell would be a place where I was forced to read your shitty non-funny comics and listen to you're retarded rants for all of eternity.

<P ID="signature"></P>

JadussD 10-29-2006 08:35 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> What is after life? I say its when you rot and what ever is
> eating you you are now it and a pile of waste left over

Interesting, but could it not be said that the individual who believes he is going to die is wondering what happens to his consciousness after this happens? Could it not be said that when we see someone live, it is a mere representation of a living being which we believe contains so much more than is apparent to the eye, such as thoughts, desires, habits, beliefs etc? Could it not be said, that just as a person is more than we can _see_, that they're also more than we can understand? Do we even understand ourselves on a conceptual level?

If we were to only understand ourselves to the extent of our ability to understand, could it not be said that we don't understand ourselves completely, as we have reached the limit of our understanding? Could it not be said that we only understand ourselves mostly as found from knowledge gained from sources which are bound to physical senses, those senses for which we have created words for, and give us data we can name with words? What divides an image created in one's mind from an image which comes in through the eyes?

Is it possible that there is a non-physical mind we have, which is in essence, CREATING what we perceive, and that the images we create "in our heads" are mere reflections of the same part of our minds which creates the universe, but we are cut off from by our addiction to our lower selves? Could it by that our mind "here" has divided itself from its higher self with its language based thought into a separate "I", which is an ignorant participant, only able to understand on their own, primitive self-centered terms those things which come from the part of the mind that animates the universe they live in, from which they are usually denied access to due to their ignorance, selfish desires, and physically oriented perspective? Could it be then, that "death" is merely the victory of this higher mind in its quest to "reunite" the "renegade" part of itself, by creating a world around this "renegade" in which it thinks that it dies? Could not religion be seen as a primitive way that the "renegade" part of the mind, controlled by "words" seeks to "appease" this higher mind, to through various means, "re-establish harmony" with the higher mind, by learning what pleases it, and what doesn't? By separating oneself from a higher consciousness which creates the reality the lower creature occupies, one causes the higher self to send disharmony and chaos as a way to create a reality which will cause the lower self to "die", or cause the energy which comprises the enviroment and being of the lower self to be used for other purposes. Perhaps the higher self wished to experience certain things, and lives vicariously through you. Perhaps it was tired of love, and wanted to experience hate. Maybe the higher-self was tired of being so powerful, and wanted to create a challenge for himself. Maybe the higher self has a sadistic streak, and wants to see how long we can get by with a primitive view of existence. Maybe the higher self wanted to create a "physical" reality for no reason. Maybe reality is infinite, and the means that the higher self creates your perceived reality are multiplexed, consisting of the infinite means which could all lead to the moment you perceive as "now". Maybe to the higher self, all things are both true and false at the same time, as to the higher self, all things are infinite and something is always a false simplification of something higher than it.

One could also be seen as causing the detached "higher mind" to create a reality for them which is full of fear, hatred, and various other assorted problems which they have brought upon themselves. In effect, due to self-hatred, caused by being absorbed with the knowledge in this reality, the higher self seeks to destroy them. Since their enviroment and others within it are actually themselves, any attempt to hurt others is an attempt to hurt oneself. By learning to "love" others, one learns to love oneself, and this creates a link to the higher self, when one becomes not focused on one's physical self, but on the people around it as well. This in turn causes the higher self to put the physical self in a world with greater harmony, one where the higher-self can "enjoy" itself more, and won't create a reality which attempts to bring the energy that comprises his word-addled component back to himself to be used in other endeavors, but allow this component to continue as he desires, and grant him a sense of fulfillment and happiness. It could be seen as one "coming back" to oneself, either way.

t is also possible that death and ignorance is sort of an obstacle placed by the higher-self to allow his renegade lower self to try to overcome death by various means, or even embrace it. This would create many competing ways to try to solve this dillema. Most religions believe in life after death, and the love of some deity or of love as a manifestation of some force or awareness. The problem is, that they might all be talking about the same thing, while arguing over minutae which arise when one tries to describe something as a lower being which is difficult to even understand to one who actually gets it, let alone put into words for others to understand. This would be a serious problem, as it could cause a situation where others are led to the higher self, and then people come to believe that the higher self is and isn't certain things. When these become absolute truths, they cause conflict with all other absolute truths that they encounter. In this way, the higher self is externalized further from one's lower self, and is seen as contradicting things by different people who all believe that everyone else is wrong about the same thing they're all RIGHT about. In essence, they've become so detached from their higher selves that create their existence and world that they believe that they can only be freed of death, or worse, torment after death, by adhering to, or worse, killing in the name of a word-based conception of something which is only understandable from a perspective which is beyond word-based notions of right/wrong, yes/no, true/false, or other binary oppositions which are based on a simplified view of existence which doesn't hold up as very absolute when its fundamental assumptions are questioned.

<P ID="signature"></P>

shawn 10-29-2006 08:47 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
Are you trying to say that our conscience or internal morals are our actual soul and language is messing up our lives? That our feelings are us? That's what it seems your trying to say and when you do something against them because language/intellect tells you your feelings are wrong then your going against your soul.
<P ID="signature">Get off your ass and do it because it isn't going to happen on it's own no matter how much you wish it would.</P>

pipes 10-29-2006 08:50 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
Wow long.
Bla, I think your thinking too much. The only reason why people feel the need to think about the afterlife is self preservation. Animals do not have this problem because of the way they evolved and we are sentient beings. We know we will die and we know we are alive. Self preservation is an animal instinct that fucks with out higher brain functions. What people do is create a world or something to help silence the instinct. When you die your brain turns off. What happens to memory in RAM when you turn off a computer. Thats whats going to happen to your memories and everything else you have "saved" to your brain. Its as simple as that. Nothing more or less. You die and life goes on.
<P ID="signature">The pipes clangor all the time!</P>

JadussD 10-29-2006 09:49 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> Wow long.
> Bla, I think your thinking too much.

That doesn't do much to stifle my feelings that people are bound by making ignorant assumptions about existence which all can be shown to be inconsistent. In a way, any time you posit an absolute truth like "dead is dead, period", you negate infinite possibilties which could be demonstrated as alternatives to the absolute truth. Everything I have been doing is based on deconstructing reality by pointing out its assumptions. I could go on forever, showing how language is contradictory and creates the illusion of an objective reality which has "truths". If people believe in this take on reality, they've totally closed themselves off to infinite possibilties.

HINT: There is a higher self, difficult to reach, which has NOT done this, and is the part of you that has constructed the world you are a part of, and you are distanced from it by your belief that you are not, in fact, the universe. We all are. You are in essence conversing with yourself in this conversation, just as I am conversing with myself when I speak to you. In this way, we could be seen as part of something no different than the part of a brain that sends one signal to another part of the brain, and allows ideas to be formed. Without the higher self, this seems absurd. However, with the higher self, existence and choices could be seen as a way of seamlessly moving through an infinite consciousness, of in effect, choosing where in reality we go. If we go to the part where we gain the knowledge of this higher self, we can consciously change the position within the infinite that we occupy. This is the "big secret" that people don't know about, because they're in a part of the infinite where the higher self has created something that's detached from it by being a consciousness heavily reliant on means of understanding itself that are inaccurate. Since it doesn't know that there's something else it can tap into, to allow it to change reality not just through moving its physical body, but by merely THINKING about stuff, one totally misunderstands their full potential. The more people who are around you, the more people who are you. :)

However, the more people who think that they're just "me", the less control "you" have. Now, in thinking about negative thoughts, that things are negative, one actually _creates_ a negative reality (which would be the case in "this" reality as I see it now, as the higher self is mysterious, and us physical beings are controlled by fear of what we can't wrap our senses around).

The higher self hates fear though. Fear dissipates the higher self. Ask it to do something that doesn't benefit anyone but yourself, and whatever it takes from others to create in your reality will probably come back to bite you in some way. In other words, "be careful what you wish for" and "don't be self-centered"

And another thing, since the higher self is the creator of infinite things both perceivable and unseen, it considers "not wanting" something, as in, focusing on something you don't want as the same thing as wanting it, since the image in your head of what you don't want causes it to exist, as in reality there's no real division between you and anything else, and not wanting it brings you to a place in the infinite that people who "want it" would go to.

This is the source of all "magic", supernatural phenomena, paranormal stuff, alien abductions, and other weirdness: people creating a reality bound by slightly different, non-absolute rules co-existing with people who believe that reality is "objective", or that scientfic laws determine the nature of the reality experienced, rather than the other way around. So that's why none of that shit can be proved: the people who want the proof exist in a reality where its not possible to prove it, as they've made it objective while the others made it subjective.

These are the big secrets about existence. Quit thinking you're a puny limited powerless being. You're only that if you think you are, which you do. Get over your "self".
<P ID="signature"></P>

pipes 10-29-2006 01:43 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
Say there is a cat in a box. You walk past the box and had no idea the cat was in there. Does the cat exist? Ripples through the universe. Cause and effect. Your compost thar buddy! You exist you have always existed and will forever exist. Not in the form that you know but as a wave. Ride the wave.<img src=smilies/magbiggrin.gif>
<P ID="signature">The pipes clangor all the time!</P>

punjman 10-29-2006 04:21 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 

> I do believe that there is a problem here. If most people
> think that hell is a fiery torment place that they go to,
> won't the "definition" found when it is "looked up" reflect
> this perception?

Using long drawn out sentences does not a learned person make.

Here's a hint in your search for the real hell.

"Sheol".

<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 10-29-2006 04:22 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> Hell would be a place where I was forced to read your shitty
> non-funny comics and listen to you're retarded rants for all
> of eternity.
<img src=smilies/laff.gif><img src=smilies/laff.gif><img src=smilies/laff.gif>
http://myspace-252.vo.llnwd.net/0095...56313252_l.jpg
<img src=smilies/laff.gif><img src=smilies/laff.gif><img src=smilies/laff.gif>
<P ID="signature"></P>

icenine0 11-01-2006 11:18 PM

In the afterlife...
 
you could be headed for the serious strife
now you make the scene all day
but tomorrow there'll be hell to pay

people listen attentively
i mean about future calamity
i used to think the idea was obsolete
until I heard the old man stamping his feet.

this is a place where eternally
fire is applied to the body
teeth are extruded and bones are ground
then baked into cakes which are passed around.
<P ID="signature"></P>

JadussD 11-02-2006 02:59 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> Using long drawn out sentences does not a learned person
> make.
>
> Here's a hint in your search for the real hell.

> "Sheol".
>

<CENTER>http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f3...D/Image002.jpg</CENTER>
<P ID="signature"></P>

Porchmonkey 11-02-2006 03:31 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> "Sheol"

Wow, throw around a Hebrew concept you absolutely no idea what it actually means. Sheol is figurative for the desolation of the grave, death itself. Not an actual place.

Unless of course you think the afterlife we're all doomed for is sleeping in some giant underground cave for all eternity,



<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-02-2006 04:49 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> Wow, throw around a Hebrew concept you absolutely no idea
> what it actually means. Sheol is figurative for the
> desolation of the grave, death itself. Not an actual place.

lol@wrasslers trying to be smRt.

Sheol is the direct word for 'grave', not the desolation of such. Moron.
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-02-2006 04:50 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> > wah!

lol@you

<P ID="signature"></P>

Porchmonkey 11-02-2006 09:32 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> lol@wrasslers trying to be smRt.
>
> Sheol is the direct word for 'grave', not the desolation of
> such. Moron.

lol@biblically illiterate goyim who pretend to know Hebrew

Then why is it figuratively described as a place in several verses? Why if Sheol simply means "grave" there a separate word that means grave (kevar)?

Sheol is the state of death that is common to all mankind.


I may not be brilliant, but my parents did make me go to Hebrew school for over a decade. Now STFU and go learn some Hebrew before you call this "wrassler" a moron for knowing more than you.
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-02-2006 09:38 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> lol@biblically illiterate goyim who pretend to know Hebrew

> Then why is it figuratively described as a place in several
> verses? Why if Sheol simply means "grave" there a separate
> word that means grave (kevar)?

> Sheol is the state of death that is common to all mankind.


> I may not be brilliant, but my parents did make me go to
> Hebrew school for over a decade. Now STFU and go learn some
> Hebrew before you call this "wrassler" a moron for knowing
> more than you.

lol@CaptainJew the wrassler

Is it possible to be white trash AND Jewish? I thought they were mutually exclusive. You should have paid more attention in 'hebrew school'.
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-02-2006 09:39 PM

Re: In the afterlife...
 
That poem is so good it could almost be a really shitty song by a really shitty band that disappeared into oblivion.
<P ID="signature"></P>

icenine0 11-02-2006 09:42 PM

This is...
 
http://www.somethingawful.com/index.php?a=4116punjman tv</A>

> That poem is so good it could almost be a really shitty song
> by a really shitty band that disappeared into oblivion.
>
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-02-2006 09:47 PM

Re: This is...
 
> punjman tv


The Revolution thread is in the other forum dunce.
<P ID="signature"></P>

Porchmonkey 11-02-2006 10:29 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> lol@CaptainJew the wrassler
>
> Is it possible to be white trash AND Jewish? I thought they
> were mutually exclusive. You should have paid more
> attention in 'hebrew school'.

lol@sterotypes

It's entirely possible, and I'm proof of that. Also, being a "wrassler" I make up too 300-500 dollars for working 15-30 minutes. Since we're going to give stereotypes such credence I think this would go under the lazy, greedy jew category.

You still have yet to answer that if Sheol if "the direct word for grave" how could there be a much more common word (kevar) used for grave as well? Instead you barrage someone with retarded sterotypes because you are too stupid to make an argument or admit you were mistaken.
<P ID="signature"></P>

Porchmonkey 11-02-2006 10:31 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
Jaduss your so hawt. I want to run my fingers through your metal hair. Let me have your babies!

<P ID="signature"></P>

shawn 11-02-2006 10:47 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> Jaduss your so hawt. I want to run my fingers through your
> metal hair. Let me have your babies!
>
The hair rocks totally but I think he should shave the beard and mustache. I remember him from when he put his first image up and he looked pretty cool without the facial hair. *JadussD, just my opinion bud, you are cool either way in my book* <img src=smilies/magbiggrin.gif>
<P ID="signature">Get off your ass and do it because it isn't going to happen on it's own no matter how much you wish it would.</P>

JadussD 11-06-2006 07:13 PM

Re: This is...
 
> The Revolution thread is in the other forum dunce.
>

You know, flipping you off was dumb and immature. I apologize; as you know not and know not that you know not, you are already your own worst enemy, and falling into your trap by getting angry just hurts me, just as it hurts you by reaffirming your own prejudices. I hope that some day you understand that you know not, and then come to understand that this could actually be seen as a form of "meta-knowing", and opens up a world which you wouldn't believe existed unless you experienced it for yourself. I will say that realizing this made me a much happier person, and probably saved my life. Anyways, keep it "real"!
<P ID="signature"></P>

CEpeep 11-06-2006 07:24 PM

Re: This is...
 
How do I learned epistemology?
<P ID="signature"><font size="-2">I wish this song was louder.</font></P>

Porchmonkey 11-06-2006 07:28 PM

Re: In the afterlife...
 
> That poem is so good it could almost be a really shitty song
> by a really shitty band that disappeared into oblivion.
>

Like a shitty web comic that disappeared into oblivion?

RED RED WIIIIIINNNEEE
<P ID="signature"></P>

JadussD 11-06-2006 07:38 PM

Re: This is...
 
> How do I learned epistemology?

Good point. I guess I'm trying, in a way, to reaffirm this all to myself, to repeat what I know (in language form, constantly reminding others that words are inadequete, but to show the way toward self-knowledgE) Really, I guess this is an exercise for my own benefit. In helping others I try to expand my own influence on my reality by helping others do the same.
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-06-2006 08:18 PM

Re: In the afterlife...
 
> Like a shitty web comic that disappeared into oblivion?
>
> RED RED WIIIIIINNNEEE


lol...

'wrasslin hebrew'.
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-06-2006 08:20 PM

Re: This is...
 
>long wordy reply that equals nothing

So you getting angry at me almost made you kill yourself?

<img src=smilies/thumb.gif>
<P ID="signature"></P>

shawn 11-06-2006 10:02 PM

Re: In the afterlife...
 
> > That poem is so good it could almost be a really shitty
> song by a really shitty band that disappeared into oblivion.

> RED RED WIIIIIINNNEEE

UB 40, unfortunately I know this, lol. <img src=smilies/laff.gif>
<P ID="signature">Get off your ass and do it because it isn't going to happen on it's own no matter how much you wish it would.</P>

JadussD 11-07-2006 12:21 AM

Re: This is...
 
> >long wordy reply that equals nothing
>
> So you getting angry at me almost made you kill yourself?
>

From the perspective of someone who knows that "nothing" is a concealing of infinite possibilities, thanks for the compliment! And yes, you getting angry made me almost kill myself. I had the gun in my mouth, ready to pull the trigger. You had that much of an effect on me. I was doing just fine until you came in and made extremely feeble attempts to speak from the perspective of "reality" what you so obviously "know".

I'm sorry to hear about your attention span and unenlightened philosophical viewpoint; I hope they improve.
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-07-2006 12:26 AM

Re: This is...
 
Oh... you're still alive.<img src=smilies/cwm10.gif>

Is your hair still really scraggly and unwashed? If you wash it you might feel better.
<P ID="signature"></P>

JadussD 11-07-2006 01:46 AM

Re: This is...
 
> Oh... you're still alive.
>
> Is your hair still really scraggly and unwashed? If you
> wash it you might feel better.

Nope, it isn't actually. But if it makes you feel better about your fears and insecurities, in an alternate reality, it still is dirty.
<P ID="signature"></P>

johnboy3434 11-09-2006 06:39 PM

Re: This is...
 
> Oh... you're still alive.
>
> Is your hair still really scraggly and unwashed? If you
> wash it you might feel better.

Dude, you lost the argument. Accept it and move on. You're not improving your image. In fact, this whole situation makes you look kind of... emo, for lack of a better word.
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-09-2006 07:15 PM

Re: This is...
 
> Dude, you lost the argument. Accept it and move on. You're
> not improving your image. In fact, this whole situation
> makes you look kind of... emo, for lack of a better word.

lol. I love it when people show up to a party that is dead and gone and try to get in on the argument even though said argument has been over for a while. Good job dude!
<P ID="signature"></P>

JadussD 11-09-2006 07:18 PM

Re: This is...
 
> lol. I love it when people show up to a party that is dead
> and gone and try to get in on the argument even though said
> argument has been over for a while. Good job dude!

The reason he showed up is because you wanted to remind yourself of how dumb you're being.

<P ID="signature"></P>

Insomnia DMX 11-09-2006 07:23 PM

Re: This is...
 
> Dude, you lost the argument. Accept it and move on. You're
> not improving your image. In fact, this whole situation
> makes you look kind of... emo, for lack of a better word.

No, that doesn't describe him well... Jaduss was talking about quantum reality and applying it to the topic. It seems that "Punjman" didn't get it... After Jaduss would say something, he'd miss the point, or at least demonstrate that he didn't know, with an unwitty comment often substantiating Jaduss' previous post. I'm not trying to instigate flames or anything, just giving a more justified explanation than "emo."
<P ID="signature">http://users.adelphia.net/~InsomniaDMX/My crappy little site.</a></P>

punjman 11-09-2006 07:24 PM

Re: This is...
 
> The reason he showed up is because you wanted to remind
> yourself of how dumb you're being.

Hmm... I thought you were actually trying to be insulting in the other thread with the awful insults, but it seems this is really the way you do business.

Sad. Poor poor baby. Highschool must have been brutal with that kind of self defense. You have my pity. And I'm laughing at you.
<P ID="signature"></P>

JadussD 11-09-2006 07:27 PM

Re: This is...
 
> Hmm... I thought you were actually trying to be insulting in
> the other thread with the awful insults, but it seems this
> is really the way you do business.

> Sad. Poor poor baby. Highschool must have been brutal with
> that kind of self defense. You have my pity. And I'm
> laughing at you.

Its not a defense mechanism, you criticizing it is. Quit projecting your problems onto me. Then again, I'd hate to live in your world if you actually became self-aware, oh man.
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-09-2006 07:28 PM

Re: This is...
 
> Its not a defense mechanism, you criticizing it is. Quit
> projecting your problems onto me. Then again, I'd hate to
> live in your world if you actually became self-aware, oh
> man.

dude.. stop, I almost choked on my drink with that laugh. Really, you're pitiful.
<P ID="signature"></P>

JadussD 11-09-2006 07:34 PM

Re: This is...
 
> dude.. stop, I almost choked on my drink with that laugh.
> Really, you're pitiful.

If you only knew how dumb you're making yourself look, you'd laugh. Let me put it this way: you're scared as hell, and that's why you won't stop responding with pitiful, baseless insults to ideas which scare the crap out of you because you're scared of your own shadow.

<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-09-2006 07:35 PM

Re: This is...
 
> If you only knew how dumb you're making yourself look, you'd
> laugh. Let me put it this way: you're scared as hell, and
> that's why you won't stop responding with pitiful, baseless
> insults to ideas which scare the crap out of you because
> you're scared of your own shadow.

lol. Dude, you just described yourself. Seriously.

Seriously.
<P ID="signature"></P>

JadussD 11-09-2006 07:41 PM

Re: This is...
 
> lol. Dude, you just described yourself. Seriously.
>
> Seriously.
>

The funny part is, I KNOW WHY I'M DOING THIS, YOU DON'T.
<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-09-2006 07:46 PM

Re: This is...
 

> The funny part is, I KNOW WHY I'M DOING THIS, YOU DON'T.

Of course I do. You're a nerd with very little ammo left in his rifle. Hell I've even been feeding you lines in the other thread.

It's sad really.
<P ID="signature"></P>

puzzl 11-09-2006 07:50 PM

Re: This is...
 

> It's sad really.
>

/me laughs at the irony of this situation.
<P ID="signature"><center>http://omgpants.googlepages.com/sarahsig.png
Delightful!</center></P>

JadussD 11-09-2006 07:52 PM

Re: This is...
 
> Of course I do. You're a nerd with very little ammo left in
> his rifle. Hell I've even been feeding you lines in the
> other thread.
>
> It's sad really.

Let me put it this way: everything in the universe is one consciousness. View this entire conversation as you thinking to yourself.

<P ID="signature"></P>

punjman 11-09-2006 07:55 PM

Re: This is...
 
>
> Let me put it this way: everything in the universe is one
> consciousness. View this entire conversation as you thinking
> to yourself.

I'd rather not, because then that would mean you are me - and I am in o way a scraggly haired virgin who is longwinded.

lol one conciousness. OK Locutus. See you back at the cube.
<P ID="signature"></P>

JadussD 11-09-2006 07:57 PM

Re: This is...
 
> I'd rather not, because then that would mean you are me -
> and I am in o way a scraggly haired virgin who is
> longwinded.

> lol one conciousness. OK Locutus. See you back at the cube.
>

Yeah seriously, you're god. It's just that you suck at being God, that's why the world is so fucked up. There's another consciousness, above the one you have right now. You're just afraid of it. That's why you think we "die".
<P ID="signature"></P>

Danoz 11-10-2006 10:19 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
Most humans are obsessed with their mortality. Fear of death and nonexistence is part of an intense evolutionary design towards self-preservation, which paradoxically includes a fear of ultimate death (an inevitable end to life). One thing is certain, whether or not our consciousness continues past death, our connection with Earth as we know it is permanently severed. This fear of death is often quelled by legacy (children, grandchildren, life's work etc).

Ultimately, I do believe in the continuance of my consciousness after life... but this alone isn't enough to end a fear of death. I fear early death, where I have absolutely no fear of growing old and dying. I fear death without legacy, not "being famous", but leaving a passion behind that is significant enough to offer an ending contribution to humanity. I find your points interesting. People forget sometimes that these concepts are highly limited by our own ability to communicate them. I hope to have a continued consciousness, that the mind is simply a vessel for the "soul".
<P ID="signature">http://www.oz3d.com/signature1.png
http://www.oz3d.com</P>

Crazy_MYKL 11-11-2006 06:02 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
SPOILERS: After you die is exactly like before you are concieved.
<P ID="signature"><p align="center">http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/4...nstairsml6.gif</p>
</P>

JadussD 11-11-2006 12:50 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> SPOILERS: After you die is exactly like before you are
> concieved.

There's no such thing as death; you just think other people die because you're insane.

<P ID="signature"></P>

UncleOral 11-14-2006 04:41 AM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
“It is often said that before you die your life passes before your eyes. It is in fact true. It's called living.” - Terry Pratchett
<P ID="signature">http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...samuspreg2.jpg</P>

Sliver X 11-27-2006 06:09 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
Yeah, sorry for necroposting, but here's my take on the afterlife.

There is none, unless you consider oblivion an afterlife. Conciousness is simply a result of chemical and electrical activity in the brain.

A very simple way to prove this is to take something like LSD; in high amounts, you start getting synesthesia, which means the sensory inputs going into the brain start getting crossed. You can literally taste light, see sound, etc, and the complete shattering of normal reality can be disturbing, to say the least. Thought processes also become radically different, and the stream of conciousness takes on completely different forms.

Once you see how your mind and reality itself can be percieved in such a radically different way from adding one chemical into the machinary of the brain, you have a hard time not believing that your mind is simply a biochemical phenomenon.

Also, I have a brother who's went into a couple of diabetic comas. During these times, he said it was just like he closed his eyes, and an instant later he was in the hospital. Since the brain basically shuts down all but fundamental processes in a coma, I imagine this is exactly what death is like; slipping into nothingness. As Crazy_MYKL said, this would be exactly like what it was like for you before you were born. Try thinking of that for a while.

Which, really, isn't so bad, I would think, because it's not like you can reflect on the subject and decide whether it's good or it sucks after the fact. :p
<P ID="signature">irc.esper.net / #rom-hacking: Hack the r0hms, bro.</P>

JadussD 11-27-2006 07:24 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
There is none, unless you consider oblivion an afterlife.
> Conciousness is simply a result of chemical and electrical
> activity in the brain.

Hahahaha, you are shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.
<P ID="signature"></P>

johnboy3434 12-02-2006 10:14 PM

Re: The "afterlife"
 
> Hahahaha, you are shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.

Indeed, my friend. Indeed.
<P ID="signature"></P>

Insomnia DMX 12-03-2006 01:45 AM

Abuse of the topic...
 
Although I am a failure as a true Nihilist, and me posting an opinion like I care proves it, I think that both Sliver and Jaduss are right, but they're describing two different things. Sliver's talking about the physical parts of the body that make up the mind, and Jaduss is talking about different perceptions of reality. When Sliver said "Conciousness," I think he might've used the wrong word. Maybe he was seriously bent on using it, I don't know, but being the Nihilist that I am, it doesn't matter to me.

Lately, I've been reflecting on myself, on my motivation in life; I seemed content enough with things, but I wanted to know why... I read the wiki page on Nihilism, which is how I've been looking at things for a while before then, and I read:

"...nihilism can become a false belief, when it leads individuals to discard any hope of meaning in the world and thus to invent some compensatory alternate measure of significance."
-Friedrich Nietzsche

I felt for a while that this was what I had done, what had created the empty space where my motivation should be. After about a week of continuing on, I came to a conclusion, the usual Nihilist conclusion, which I'm sure you can amagine... That isn't keeping me satisfied...

Today, I feel that we are all motivated by sensory experience. Whatever it is that we enjoy, I think that it is our senses that make it feel so good. What is the alternative? We're programmed to be this way in our genes, or so it seems. Our ancestors have created elaborate constructs that have integrated themselves within society, to avoid thinking this way. Either I am absorbed into the experiences of everyday life, or I'm depressed because I don't know why I'm doing what I'm doing. I probably will never quit, because I don't want to loose what I've made; what I've been working toward my whole life, but...

What motivates you, I'd like to see an alternative to nothing.

Jaduss, is it because you're god, and you must be god every day? Please explain to me, and know that I have open ears, unlike others. I've been told to read some of Nietzsche's work, and from what I've read at wikipedia, he seems to have some good ideas. Could you explain for me some of the stuff he talks about? Give me a nudge in the right direction, because you seem, at least from my perspective, to have it all figured out. At least give me some links to some of Nietzsche's stuff because, all I can find is the original German text.

Edit: Some of the stuff you've said almost sounds Nihilist, but, meh...
<P ID="signature">http://users.adelphia.net/~InsomniaDMX/My crappy little site.</a></P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Insomnia DMX on 12/02/06 09:49 PM.</FONT></P>

JadussD 12-03-2006 01:53 AM

Re: Abuse of the topic...
 
> Although I am a failure as a true Nihilist, and me posting
> an opinion like I care proves it, I think that both Sliver
> and Jaduss are right, but they're describing two different
> things.

Nihilism is about removing socially conditioned value, all the things that society tells you to think, so that your mind is empty of control, allowing each thought to come from your true heart. After that occurs, when even the idea that things are "true" or "false" is seen as subjective (and you'll be so empty and hopeless before the truth comes out) can one truly take control of their life from manipulators.

Basically, the idea is that the world is yourself away from yourself. But it is also NOT the world away from yourself, which is why it seems like this is not the case. Basically, you'll eventually discover that everything you think about and desire affects reality. You'll discover how basically, your true feelings manifest themselves in myriad ways throughout the world, creating the reality you experience. There is a state of mind in which what you read is you talking to yourself. Anything you say to someone is yourself talking to yourself. Fear and ignorance has driven you into a world of concepts and ideas which imprison you. You were not born when you were told you were born, you were born at your first memory. Your dreams are just as real as reality, just less predictable. It is the need for predictability and fear of responsiblity that creates the sicko world we live in. The world is an idea.

How can everyone be God? How about this: one day you'll know my thoughts, and one day I will know your thoughts. When you die, its like waking up from a dream...you wake up at the moment you remember your life.
<P ID="signature"></P>

Insomnia DMX 12-03-2006 02:18 AM

Re: Abuse of the topic...
 
Thanks, and one more question; what you just said, is that pretty much what Nietzsche's Ãœbermensch idea was about? If not, could you explain what exactly he meant when he was talking about that?

Edit: Specifically, the being God and realizing more about reality parts of what you said.
<P ID="signature">http://users.adelphia.net/~InsomniaDMX/My crappy little site.</a></P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Insomnia DMX on 12/02/06 10:23 PM.</FONT></P>

JadussD 12-03-2006 02:27 AM

Re: Abuse of the topic...
 
> Thanks, and one more question; what you just said, is that
> pretty much what Nietzsche's Ãœbermensch idea was about? If
> not, could you explain what exactly he meant when he was
> talking about that?

I'm not entirely sure. Nietzsche was very caught up in self and ego. It is possible that much of what he says is sarcastic, meant to mean something entirely different when viewed from a different angle. It's all very subjective.
<P ID="signature"></P>

JadussD 12-03-2006 02:31 AM

Re: Abuse of the topic...
 
> I'm not entirely sure. Nietzsche was very caught up in self
> and ego. It is possible that much of what he says is
> sarcastic, meant to mean something entirely different when
> viewed from a different angle. It's all very subjective.

I would recommend checking out stuff on various movements such as gnosticism, the Rosicrucians (rosy cross) if you're familiar with Christianity, various works by Aleister Crowley. Start to also read everything in history as an explanation that only exists to fill in a memory you forgot.
<P ID="signature"></P>

Insomnia DMX 12-03-2006 02:52 AM

Re: Abuse of the topic...
 
I'll be reading up on stuff now. Google and Wikipedia can help me with everything else.

Thanks!
<P ID="signature">http://users.adelphia.net/~InsomniaDMX/My crappy little site.</a></P>


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:35 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.