• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God does not live by his own golden

Rather, red is the sense experience we have when we look at a certain wavelength of electromagnetic radiation.
exactly.

the point is that describing light with a wavelength of ~475nm as 'blue' is fine - a lot of other people will generally get it if you talk about 'blue'. but the definition 'blue' only corresponds to the subjective experience of light with a wavelength of ~475nm.

the problem is compounded by the way we 'see' colors. we have three types of cones. here's a perfectly good, simple description from wikipedia:

The first responds the most to light of long wavelengths, peaking at about 560 nm ; this type is sometimes designated L for long. The second type responds the most to light of medium-wavelength, peaking at 530 nm, and is abbreviated M for medium. The third type responds the most to short-wavelength light, peaking at 420 nm, and is designated S for short. The three types have peak wavelengths near 564–580 nm, 534–545 nm, and 420–440 nm, respectively, depending on the individual.[10][11] The difference in the signals received from the three cone types allows the brain to perceive a continuous range of colours, through the opponent process of colour vision.

so when light hits a cone what we 'see' depends on what kind of cells it hits and the wavelength of the light. our brain gets three values from the cells and tells us we're seeing a 'color'. two people can look at the same object reflecting the same wavelength of light and 'see' a different color so in what sense is any color objectively 'blue'? or whatever.

it gets even more complex when you consider the different ways eyes of different animals work.

tl;dr light comes in specific wavelengths but which wavelengths correspond to which 'color' depends entirely on the eyes of whoever or whatever happens to be doing the the viewing.

alasdair
 
You're missing the point. And I don't think you can say colours don't exist if no one sees them, like you can't say shapes don't exist.

Sound waves is one sensory phenomenon which definitely has objective existence. In fact, they can shatter a building and blow up your ear drums and make you deaf, no matter if you can hear them or not. Still, we don't hear all sound waves.

Actually, most of the things that exist we can't perceive with our senses, so the argument that something can't exist because it can't be perceived with your senses is null and void.
 
I see our minds as a network of reality generators, so whatever it is we are thinking, becomes reality eventually, hence we gotta be careful about what we think.
In my opinion, God needs to be discovered personally. It happens in a lot of ways but until this moment comes that person knows nothing about God. I think most of the life forms will only be able to come in contact with a higher state entity only after their physical death, there are exception however. Logic is useless when you ponder such concepts because our logic is limited by our memory and thinking ability, so we can only make fun of the concept of God or try to make ourselves look better and higher than everyone else and God itself by using mind on it's own.
 
Respect those who are seeking the truth; be doubtful of those who claim they have found it.
 
God is just like us.... he is everything, the ying and the yang.... but the way the human mind percieves God is by personifying his different attributes into separate entities... this makes it easier to understand his many traits.... and to help steer us in the direction we'd rather pursue... if you like the darker attributes, sex drugs rock n roll , violence , self-absorbed pleasure seeking, than you are essentially friends with the devil.... if you are seeking a fresh start , renewal and rebirth... than Jesus can help you find peace within yourself. . if you are trying to build a life of righteous organized glory, than Elohim can help you achieve your desires as long as you worship him with all your heart and follow his commandments. .

The devil if for those who believe that nothing is off limits and wish to find pleasure by any means necessary.... hell is symbolic... if you keep sinning than your existence will persist to become a living "hell on earth" ... and probably will go on for an eternity as you will keep making htose decisions once you start down that path.

its like the bible says, to find God , look within... because God , the universe , and everything is written into your makeup, its within and you will feel it when you find it there. We are all creators, we create our own meaning, we create our own kingdoms right here on earth... live in the present , and don't worry about punishment.... You will judge yourself in the end, so all the really matters is how YOU feel about YOU... because you are basically God in the end, you've just forgotten... You have much more power than you realize.
 
It seems to me that on this view, red is red, it just so happens that red is not to be identified with the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation. Rather, red is the sense experience we have when we look at a certain wavelength of electromagnetic radiation. It is logically incoherent to say that something could fail to be identical with itself.

The experience is not the same as the actual physical phenomena though. EM radiation of a certain wavelength may be seen as 'blue' to different eyes and brains and 'red' to others. The thing we call 'red' is different to the thing that causes the phenomena. Some animals don't see certain colours at all, like humans who don't see infra-red or ultraviolet or microwaves or radio waves or anything beyond the visible spectrum (which means 'the spectrum visible to humans').

For humans, it is right to say that certain wavelengths=certain experienced colour. To say that this wavelength is also red to non-humans is anthropocentric and distinctly untrue (not saying that you are saying this, just that its a possible implication). Something being absolute should probably be absolute outside of the human realm, shouldn't it?

Of course, here is the great epistemological question. No one can know if my red is the same as your red.

Why not just have one thread for name-calling theist/atheist arguments instead of letting nearly every thread be derailed by that?

Look at the title of this thread. Do we have to have another circle jerk where we all agree that Jesus is a reptile from Hades? Some people enjoy debating things. If you don't, the door is basically where you constantly send me when I even slightly doubt a touch of your statements.

I thought this thread was finally one where I won't get constantly flamed by the 'enlightened' spiritual bullies here. And its actually interesting with people talking to each other!

Sound waves is one sensory phenomenon which definitely has objective existence. In fact, they can shatter a building and blow up your ear drums and make you deaf, no matter if you can hear them or not. Still, we don't hear all sound waves.

Light in different wavelengths exists and nobody is disputing that. Colour is the value assigned within the brain to those wavelengths. The external world is the origin of this radiation but the brain itself is what makes sense of it. If you could somehow view the universe without your brain, you would not see colour- but the light of differing wavelengths would still exist. You seem to be arguing against reductionism in general, rather than the facts of the senses.

Sound is simply vibrations in the earthly medium. It doesn't exist in space, and would be incredibly different on every other planet which does not contain the same mix of gases such as oxygen and nitrogen as our atmosphere does which is the medium through which sound as we know it predictably propagates. So, it is really true to say that vibrations occur and spread throughout the terrestrial medium and that organisms that live in that medium evolved senses which vibrate sympathetically and translate these vibrations into electricity in the brain- unless you are arguing that the electrical impulses which convey sensory data are zapped into your head from outside. Animals do not hear music in the way that we do because their brain does not impose the same structure on it. Sound, like colour, exists in the raw form but it is up to the brain (of whatever animal) to filter/refine/interpret/discard it. As before, if you didn't have a brain but could play a symphony, you would be unlikely to hear the nuance of the notes, but a spectrometer would be able to tell you that vibrations of a certain frequency are occurring. The vibration occur 'outside', the actual music occurs 'inside'.

I think hearing may have evolved from the sense of touch which is basically once more a means of detecting vibrations. There is a huge difference in the experience of touch to the experience of hearing. And yet, they are in fact interpretations of the same basic phenomena. I wonder if that is why we can use touch-based metaphors to describe music and sounds- a certain note is 'sharp', a particular melody line sounds 'warm'. Anyway, just some side-thoughts.
 
Last edited:
Yea, but you seem to want to turn every spiritual thread into an atheist/theist, spiritual/materialist, or anti-Christian argument and it just derails and spoils a thread for those actually interested in the topic.

You know could start your own thread for that but you seem to prefer taking over other people's threads, like turning a discussion about enlightenment into a debate of whether there is such a thing, which turns it into a completely different discussion.

So to you people sharing and discussing spiritual ideas is a "circle jerk"? That's quite a negative point of view to come from. I guess you just don't want people to be able to discuss spiritual ideas at all. So what's the point of having a spiritual board?
 
Last edited:
You're kidding right? Literally, I've cut back and largely stopped posting here because you and others made me feel totally unwelcome and I'm tired of being flamed. I shouod express gratitude though because Ive come to realise that I'm not into spirituality as I've seen it here. Which is what I call a circle jerk because you basically don't even want the slightest dissent to your views. Any dissent and you start criticising me as a person. That's bullshit, but nobody really cares so I don't see why I should.

Surely this topic can handle some actual discussion? Why do you want to shut it down? If there's ever been a thread for debate, this is it.
 
You're missing the point...
i don't think i'm missing the point at all. i just have a different opinion to you. fancy that!

And I don't think you can say colours don't exist if no one sees them...
well, i do and i explained why in post #41. if you disagree that's fine.

...so the argument that something can't exist because it can't be perceived with your senses is null and void.
i think you're drifting now. i don't see anybody saying that.

i'm simply trying to draw a distinction between "light at ~475nm" and "blue". that's all. swilow gets it.

alasdair
 
Why can't there be room for both kinds of people? Why does it have to be either or? It just seems unrealistic.

Or why is it so important for you to beat down any spiritual topic? It's a spiritual board, you know, it kind of comes with the territory. Maybe not even read those threads if they upset you so much and you dislike spiritual people that much?

It's not that someone can't challenge my views, but when I take the time to create a thread devoted to some of the world's greatest wisdom I don't want it to get lost in a debate between our opposing points of view.

It's a derail, and I want the focus to be on the ideas that I'm trying to bring as I think that will be of more value to most of the people coming to the board than another argument between you and me. It's really as simple as that, and I don't know why that is so hard for you to understand.

And this thread was actually started to discuss the nature of God, and not to debate his existence, so that's another derailed thread.
 
in any discussion of the nature of anything, whether that thing is even a thing at all seems rather fundamental.

i suppose you can try to control or limit discussion but that seems impractical given, well, human nature.

why not start a thread and outline the limitations you'd like to place on the discussion in the first post e.g. "this thread is only for the discussion of the nature of god. it assumes god exists. please don't post if you're unwilling to accept, even for the sake of argument, god's existence."

then ask the forum moderators to keep the thread on topic.

seems a little limiting to me but if that's the kind of discusison you're after, make it happen?

alasdair
 
Well, that's what I've been trying to do (in 3 threads) and all hell broke lose. Didn't seem like such an unreasonable request. But on this board I think it's like the Mods stick up for each other, and the value of any spiritual ideas is secondary to that.
 
Last edited:
Well, that's what I've been trying to do (in 3 threads) and all hell broke lose. Didn't seem like such an unreasonable request. But on this board I think it's like the Mods stick up for each other, and the value of any spiritual ideas is secondary to that.

Nonsense, you may multiple threads where people like me don't participate. You seem annoyed that you were disagreed with so you're trying to shut down the whole discussion. You're not the only participant here.

I was asked by moderators to basically stop posting in your threads and I did it. Don't pretend you're being discriminated against.

Its not all about you though, other people may want discussions. If you don't, then don't.
 
I don't mind being disagreed with! I enjoy debate, if you didn't notice, I actually thrive off it. I just decided some things are more important than that, but you obviously don't see it that way.
 
This is incontrovertible proof that God is evil. God doesnot live by his own golden rule.

God kills when he could just as easily cure. This isirrefutable.

This is a clear violation of the golden rule. The golden ruleas articulated by Jesus.

God then is clearly evil.

Do you agree with Jesus that anyone who breaks the goldenrule is evil?

Regards
DL

To prove that god is good or evil or anything, you would first have to prove the existence of "god". So you might want to start with that.
 
I don't know why we bother giving GB the time of day, anyway, who's obviously a propaganda artist who's probably posting the same message across multiple boards.
 
It does ring some alarm bells. Still, he has a different perspective which is refreshing.
 
Funny how he just posts an opening post and doesn't return and never engages in any of the other threads. I don't know if "refreshing" is the right word. It's direly predictable, in fact, it's pretty much the same post. I find it weird how he's even allowed to post here.
 
He sometimes returns. But it is basically spamming.
 
Well, that's what I've been trying to do (in 3 threads) and all hell broke lose. Didn't seem like such an unreasonable request. But on this board I think it's like the Mods stick up for each other, and the value of any spiritual ideas is secondary to that.
i don't see a thread where you've articulated that clearly. hoping it will happen and explicitly stating it are two different things.

give it a try? i think you'll find the mods aren't the biased monsters you imply if you make your wish clear.

alasdair
 
Top