Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Sriram on July 12, 2015, 05:56:07 AM
-
Hi everyone,
Faith can be blind faith...based entirely on what someone says or what is written in some book. Faith can also be real ...based on an intuitive recognition of a subtle pattern or a hidden force working in ones life.
Not everyone is capable of the second variety because it requires significant direct experience in such matters. It depends on ones experiences, age, exposure, perception, sensitivity and so on.
Most people tend to trust the experiences of the second set of people.... their intuition, their understanding and their interpretation. This leads to blind faith...which in many cases, is built on the second variety. So...indirectly, blind faith it is also a recognition of some underlying pattern in life....(though based on someone else's experience).
Real Faith could be the subtle understanding that our subconscious/unconscious is awake and kicking at all times and largely takes care of most, if not all, decisions in our lives.
Faith is a way of letting go the illusion of conscious decision making and allowing the large and powerful subconscious/unconscious to take over. Its a way of abandoning the illusion of conscious control. In that sense its more in tune with reality than holding on to the notion of conscious effort.
Just some thoughts.
Cheers.
Sriram
-
Sriram, I have to admire the dogged persistence with which you plug away at the existence of something 'other'. You seem to have a stronger than usual need for it to exist. Why is that, do you think?
(That's a genuine question ... I have no idea of why it might be)
-
Sriram, I have to admire the dogged persistence with which you plug away at the existence of something 'other'. You seem to have a stronger than usual need for it to exist. Why is that, do you think?
(That's a genuine question ... I have no idea of why it might be)
Just go through the subconscious/unconscious thread.
-
Sriram, I have to admire the dogged persistence with which you plug away at the existence of something 'other'. You seem to have a stronger than usual need for it to exist. Why is that, do you think?
(That's a genuine question ... I have no idea of why it might be)
Just go through the subconscious/unconscious thread.
I can still see no reason in that thread as to WHY you have such a strong need to pursue it.
-
Sriram, I have to admire the dogged persistence with which you plug away at the existence of something 'other'. You seem to have a stronger than usual need for it to exist. Why is that, do you think?
(That's a genuine question ... I have no idea of why it might be)
Just go through the subconscious/unconscious thread.
I can still see no reason in that thread as to WHY you have such a strong need to pursue it.
Rather...you should tell me why in spite of new knowledge, you have this need to ignore the subconscious/unconscious and treat it as a mere appendage.
-
Rather...you should tell me why in spite of new knowledge, you have this need to ignore the subconscious/unconscious and treat it as a mere appendage.
I don't "ignore" it, but like all specialised knowledge, it has little or no impact on our day to day life.
However, I admit that you are not alone in your persistence, so I suppose it is just a matter of individual interest.
-
Rather...you should tell me why in spite of new knowledge, you have this need to ignore the subconscious/unconscious and treat it as a mere appendage.
I don't "ignore" it, but like all specialised knowledge, it has little or no impact on our day to day life.
However, I admit that you are not alone in your persistence, so I suppose it is just a matter of individual interest.
What do you mean..'it has little or no impact on our day to day life'..?! Clearly you have not yet taken in what the subconscious/unconscious really is!
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110826192433.htm Pursuing your goals..let the unconscious be your guide
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120910152011.htm Placebo response occurs at the unconscious level
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081224215542.htm Best decisions are made at the unconscious level
-
I think you are defining 'faith' as a case of letting instinct and intuition be your guide. Maybe that fails to capture some of what is meant by 'building a faith'.
-
I think you are defining 'faith' as a case of letting instinct and intuition be your guide. Maybe that fails to capture some of what is meant by 'building a faith'.
Its the same thing. Our emotions.... imagination....and our sense of individuality (ego) that attaches itself to them....make the process much more complex and elaborate.
-
What do you mean..'it has little or no impact on our day to day life'..?! Clearly you have not yet taken in what the subconscious/unconscious really is!
Of course I have! But I am also perfectly aware that our subconscious will continue to decide how we behave whether we take interest in its machinations or not. We cannot control our sub-conscious, by definition!
-
I think you are defining 'faith' as a case of letting instinct and intuition be your guide. Maybe that fails to capture some of what is meant by 'building a faith'.
Its the same thing. Our emotions.... imagination....and our sense of individuality (ego) that attaches itself to them....make the process much more complex and elaborate.
When people speak of 'building a faith', it is going further than listening to one's inner instincts, it is usually about joining in with a wider community of like minded people and strengthening a nascent sense of commitment through fellowship. That doesn't necessarily translate well as 'blind faith', that would be the literalist fringe of a faith group. But 'building a faith', to me, is ultimately about the elevation of confirmation bias into a virtue. By strengthening our commitment through fellowship we systematically distance ourselves even further from people whose experience of life is not similar to ours. It is good to be able to listen to your inner voice, but we shouldn't assume that what is valid for us, is also valid for everyone else.
-
I think this illustrates the difference between East and West in matters of 'faith'. In the West having a faith (note the 'a') generally means adhering to a clearly defined set of ideas, dogmas and rules that come from a particular religion, and believing in them accordingly. You wont find many pagans saying that they have 'faith' in that sense. What Sriram is describing is much more akin to books I've read by eastern-influenced spiritual writers, which is more like a surrendering to the process of life and trusting that you will be guided to 'see' clearly, make decisions accordingly and receive what is necessary. That doesn't necessarily even require a deity at all, just a trust - faith - in oneself.
-
I have faith in scepticism.
-
I suggest that faith in anything is quite superfluous. The universe and the life in it will continue its merry course to wherever it's going quite independently of our faith.
We can only try to live our life as best suits us and the environment, live it to the full within the confines of not harming anybody or anything else if we can avoid it.
-
..The universe and the life in it will continue its merry course to wherever it's going quite independently of our faith...
This itself not something that can be confirmed, but is an understanding of yourself in relationship to the universe .. that probably falls in the category that Sriram has labelled "real faith".
-
..The universe and the life in it will continue its merry course to wherever it's going quite independently of our faith...
This itself not something that can be confirmed, but is an understanding of yourself in relationship to the universe .. that probably falls in the category that Sriram has labelled "real faith".
I don't think it needs confirming, it is a self-evident fact. How can our faith or lack of it influence what happens to the universe?
-
..The universe and the life in it will continue its merry course to wherever it's going quite independently of our faith...
This itself not something that can be confirmed, but is an understanding of yourself in relationship to the universe .. that probably falls in the category that Sriram has labelled "real faith".
I don't think it needs confirming, it is a self-evident fact. How can our faith or lack of it influence what happens to the universe?
Can you demonstrate that the 'universe continues'? What does that even mean? How do you know that your concept of continuation isn't illusory?
-
Antitheism persist defines faith as belief against any evidence. That is linguistic totalitarianism of the Orwellian variety.
Christians define faith as trust in an experienced God.
Antitheism then persists in shoehorning that experience into their philosophical naturalism.
-
..The universe and the life in it will continue its merry course to wherever it's going quite independently of our faith...
This itself not something that can be confirmed, but is an understanding of yourself in relationship to the universe .. that probably falls in the category that Sriram has labelled "real faith".
I don't think it needs confirming, it is a self-evident fact. How can our faith or lack of it influence what happens to the universe?
Can you demonstrate that the 'universe continues'? What does that even mean? How do you know that your concept of continuation isn't illusory?
Are you serious? By `continue` I mean go on the course it has been following since it began.
Are you suggesting that everything I see round me is an illusion? :o
-
Christians define faith as trust in an experienced God.
Experienced is what, exactly? Enjoying human suffering?
-
..The universe and the life in it will continue its merry course to wherever it's going quite independently of our faith...
This itself not something that can be confirmed, but is an understanding of yourself in relationship to the universe .. that probably falls in the category that Sriram has labelled "real faith".
I don't think it needs confirming, it is a self-evident fact. How can our faith or lack of it influence what happens to the universe?
Can you demonstrate that the 'universe continues'? What does that even mean? How do you know that your concept of continuation isn't illusory?
Are you serious? By `continue` I mean go on the course it has been following since it began.
Are you suggesting that everything I see round me is an illusion? :o
Probably. Your perception of the universe is very much reliant on your subjective view and your faith that things are as you see them. It's just a story. Whether there is such a thing as reality I don't know, but each of us exists in a reality that is different from another's, based on how we experience things and judge things to be, although in order to function we put together a series of basic judgements that we generally have in common (this is a tree, this is a chair, this is the sky etc).
-
Christians define faith as trust in an experienced God.
Experienced is what, exactly? Enjoying human suffering?
Christianity put charity on the map.
-
Probably. Your perception of the universe is very much reliant on your subjective view and your faith that things are as you see them. It's just a story. Whether there is such a thing as reality I don't know, but each of us exists in a reality that is different from another's, based on how we experience things and judge things to be, although in order to function we put together a series of basic judgements that we generally have in common (this is a tree, this is a chair, this is the sky etc).
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
I am with you in that we each have our own perception of ourselves, other people and things, (the latter, on the whole, are the same), but to suggest that the whole of the universe and life may be just an illusion is, to me, quite ridiculous.
-
I think you are defining 'faith' as a case of letting instinct and intuition be your guide. Maybe that fails to capture some of what is meant by 'building a faith'.
Its the same thing. Our emotions.... imagination....and our sense of individuality (ego) that attaches itself to them....make the process much more complex and elaborate.
When people speak of 'building a faith', it is going further than listening to one's inner instincts, it is usually about joining in with a wider community of like minded people and strengthening a nascent sense of commitment through fellowship. That doesn't necessarily translate well as 'blind faith', that would be the literalist fringe of a faith group. But 'building a faith', to me, is ultimately about the elevation of confirmation bias into a virtue. By strengthening our commitment through fellowship we systematically distance ourselves even further from people whose experience of life is not similar to ours. It is good to be able to listen to your inner voice, but we shouldn't assume that what is valid for us, is also valid for everyone else.
People like Jesus and Moses (in my view) develop an understanding of their inner consciousness in what I have mentioned as the real faith. When they arrive at an understanding of the subtle patterns and processes....they also teach people based on this understanding....but in a manner to suit the culture and understanding of the people. This is what all sages and yogis in India (including Mahavira and Buddha) have done.
Ordinary people accept these teachings as valid purely on 'blind' faith and also tend to associate these teachings with the lifestyle, social norms and other teachings of that person. Instinctively the people try to teach others about these teachings.... since we all are programmed to propagate whatever beliefs we hold. This is how the basic understanding of the original teacher slowly becomes a 'religious faith' and a dogma.
These extended teachings and dogma could be different in different cultures...but the original understanding of the different teachers cannot be different....though interpretations could be different. The understanding is bound to be the same for such original teachers (sages) because it is based on an understanding of real phenomena....somewhat like different scientists in different countries.
-
What do you mean..'it has little or no impact on our day to day life'..?! Clearly you have not yet taken in what the subconscious/unconscious really is!
Of course I have! But I am also perfectly aware that our subconscious will continue to decide how we behave whether we take interest in its machinations or not. We cannot control our sub-conscious, by definition!
Correct! Wow! You sound just like a devout theist. ;)
As you say, we cannot control our subconscious.... but the subconscious decides and controls most aspects of our life. So...surrendering to its will makes sense...doesn't it?! That is what the faithful do.
Get rid of the illusion of control and you will be happy and also go with the flow.
-
Correct! Wow! You sound just like a devout theist. ;)
Oh my gawd, you must have misunderstood me then. I meant to say that although we can't control our subconscious mind, it is still our own mind, and the decisions it makes are our own.
As you say, we cannot control our subconscious.... but the subconscious decides and controls most aspects of our life. So...surrendering to its will makes sense...doesn't it?! That is what the faithful do.
No they don't! They surrender to the will of an entity invented by somebody else.
Get rid of the illusion of control and you will be happy and also go with the flow.
Never! I will continue to make my own decisions, whether they be subconscious or conscious.
-
Correct! Wow! You sound just like a devout theist. ;)
Oh my gawd, you must have misunderstood me then. I meant to say that although we can't control our subconscious mind, it is still our own mind, and the decisions it makes are our own.
As you say, we cannot control our subconscious.... but the subconscious decides and controls most aspects of our life. So...surrendering to its will makes sense...doesn't it?! That is what the faithful do.
No they don't! They surrender to the will of an entity invented by somebody else.
Get rid of the illusion of control and you will be happy and also go with the flow.
Never! I will continue to make my own decisions, whether they be subconscious or conscious.
You have not got my point. If you have no control over what the subconscious thinks or does...what do you mean that its decisions are 'our own'?!
People may accept the teachings of some teachers on blind faith. I agree and that is what I have said in my OP. They may also anthropomorphize (?) these forces as we human usually do. That does not mean they are talking about something different from the natural subconscious forces.
I am of course not for a moment imagining that we actually understand these forces to any significant degree....its all only about acknowledging them.
-
I think this illustrates the difference between East and West in matters of 'faith'. In the West having a faith (note the 'a') generally means adhering to a clearly defined set of ideas, dogmas and rules that come from a particular religion, and believing in them accordingly. You wont find many pagans saying that they have 'faith' in that sense. What Sriram is describing is much more akin to books I've read by eastern-influenced spiritual writers, which is more like a surrendering to the process of life and trusting that you will be guided to 'see' clearly, make decisions accordingly and receive what is necessary. That doesn't necessarily even require a deity at all, just a trust - faith - in oneself.
The defined set of ideas and dogma of any group of people arise from the culture and teachings of the original teacher (like Jesus or Moses). These get propagated as rigid ideas over a period of time...and could even get distorted over time. But they are originally based on real experiences of natural forces that exist in all of us.
-
You have not got my point. If you have no control over what the subconscious thinks or does...what do you mean that its decisions are 'our own'?!
I mean that decisions are taken by our own subconscious brain. If you are trying to suggest that because it's subconscious it may be under some external control, how do you explain that it always seems to agree with my conscious brain?
People may accept the teachings of some teachers on blind faith. I agree and that is what I have said in my OP. They may also anthropomorphize (?) these forces as we human usually do. That does not mean they are talking about something different from the natural subconscious forces.
I see no evidence for "natural subconscious forces".
I am of course not for a moment imagining that we actually understand these forces to any significant degree....its all only about acknowledging them.
Show me the evidence for them and if I find it convincing I will acknowledge their existence.
-
I think this illustrates the difference between East and West in matters of 'faith'. In the West having a faith (note the 'a') generally means adhering to a clearly defined set of ideas, dogmas and rules that come from a particular religion, and believing in them accordingly. You wont find many pagans saying that they have 'faith' in that sense. What Sriram is describing is much more akin to books I've read by eastern-influenced spiritual writers, which is more like a surrendering to the process of life and trusting that you will be guided to 'see' clearly, make decisions accordingly and receive what is necessary. That doesn't necessarily even require a deity at all, just a trust - faith - in oneself.
The defined set of ideas and dogma of any group of people arise from the culture and teachings of the original teacher (like Jesus or Moses). These get propagated as rigid ideas over a period of time...and could even get distorted over time. But they are originally based on real experiences of natural forces that exist in all of us.
Of course we cannot verify the nature of the experience of long dead people. It has been noted for instance that the conversion of St Paul is consistent with the symptomology of epilepsy, which often involves intense religious hallucinations. That would be another thread of course, but it should caution us against putting too much faith in the claims and resulting teachings of individuals, especially long dead ones.
-
Probably. Your perception of the universe is very much reliant on your subjective view and your faith that things are as you see them. It's just a story. Whether there is such a thing as reality I don't know, but each of us exists in a reality that is different from another's, based on how we experience things and judge things to be, although in order to function we put together a series of basic judgements that we generally have in common (this is a tree, this is a chair, this is the sky etc).
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
I am with you in that we each have our own perception of ourselves, other people and things, (the latter, on the whole, are the same), but to suggest that the whole of the universe and life may be just an illusion is, to me, quite ridiculous.
Laugh all you like, Len. This isn't woo, it's physics.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/physicists-discover-clearest-evidence-yet-that-the-universe-is-a-hologram-9000748.html
-
Laugh all you like, Len. This isn't woo, it's physics.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/physicists-discover-clearest-evidence-yet-that-the-universe-is-a-hologram-9000748.html
I'm not pretending to understand any of that scientific stuff, but I can't see how it suggests that everything is a delusion ... it just seems to be saying that we don't see it as we think we do.
But surely that is completely unimportant ... we can only operate according to the way things seem to us, whether it's correct or not.
-
Laugh all you like, Len. This isn't woo, it's physics.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/physicists-discover-clearest-evidence-yet-that-the-universe-is-a-hologram-9000748.html
I'm not pretending to understand any of that scientific stuff, but I can't see how it suggests that everything is a delusion ... it just seems to be saying that we don't see it as we think we do.
But surely that is completely unimportant ... we can only operate according to the way things seem to us, whether it's correct or not.
That is exactly it, Len. There is a difference between delusion and illusion and it seems that our understanding of our world is illusory. We can only operate as though everything is how it appears but we cannot demonstrate that everything is as it seems, and that includes your ideas about the universe 'continuing'.
-
That is exactly it, Len. There is a difference between delusion and illusion and it seems that our understanding of our world is illusory. We can only operate as though everything is how it appears but we cannot demonstrate that everything is as it seems, and that includes your ideas about the universe 'continuing'.
Why? I saw nothing in that article to suggest that the universe won't continue in it's course.
-
The defined set of ideas and dogma of any group of people arise from the culture and teachings of the original teacher (like Jesus or Moses). These get propagated as rigid ideas over a period of time...and could even get distorted over time. But they are originally based on real experiences of natural forces that exist in all of us.
The problem with this is that in Jesus' case, a lot of the 'defined set of ideas and dogma' did not arise from the culture in which Jesus grew up. In fact they didn't come from any culture before him.
-
Of course we cannot verify the nature of the experience of long dead people. It has been noted for instance that the conversion of St Paul is consistent with the symptomology of epilepsy, which often involves intense religious hallucinations. That would be another thread of course, but it should caution us against putting too much faith in the claims and resulting teachings of individuals, especially long dead ones.
The danger with this kind of critique is that we feel that we can't learn from history; not merely ancient history but even recent history.
-
Of course we cannot verify the nature of the experience of long dead people. It has been noted for instance that the conversion of St Paul is consistent with the symptomology of epilepsy, which often involves intense religious hallucinations. That would be another thread of course, but it should caution us against putting too much faith in the claims and resulting teachings of individuals, especially long dead ones.
The danger with this kind of critique is that we feel that we can't learn from history; not merely ancient history but even recent history.
Can you name an intense religious hallucination.(please don't say St Pauls conversion).
-
Of course we cannot verify the nature of the experience of long dead people. It has been noted for instance that the conversion of St Paul is consistent with the symptomology of epilepsy, which often involves intense religious hallucinations. That would be another thread of course, but it should caution us against putting too much faith in the claims and resulting teachings of individuals, especially long dead ones.
The danger with this kind of critique is that we feel that we can't learn from history; not merely ancient history but even recent history.
Can you name an intense religious hallucination.(please don't say St Pauls conversion).
Wnot? There was St.Francis. There are plenty if you care to research.
-
People with temporal lobe epilepsy have them all the time. People who've ingested LSD and DMT likewise.
-
People with temporal lobe epilepsy have them all the time. People who've ingested LSD and DMT likewise.
Yes, maybe in your world, though I doubt Bernardone, for one, had access to the dealers!!
-
He wouldn't have needed it - DMT is naturally produced in the human body.
-
He wouldn't have needed it - DMT is naturally produced in the human body.
And how would you know to whom it applies?
-
And how would you know to whom it applies?
By reportage of the content of the hallucinations. DMT in particular is notable for giving rise to hallucinations of hard to describe or define beings - humanoid beings - perceived to be otherworldly. Which could, depending on your prior worldview/belief system, be interpreted as angels, etc.
-
And how would you know to whom it applies?
By reportage of the content of the hallucinations. DMT in particular is notable for giving rise to hallucinations of hard to describe or define beings - humanoid beings - perceived to be otherworldly.
And just how many" contents" are ever studied, out of the entire population - of the world!!
-
Quite a lot. It's fascinating stuff, you should read up on it. Try Terrence McKenna especially.
-
Quite a lot. It's fascinating stuff, you should read up on it. Try Terrence McKenna especially.
And how would he know about the likes of Bernardone, or anyone who lived centuries ago?
-
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Hebrews 1:1
"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17
Faith "ground or confidence"
"Faith is simply the channel through which God's grace to us is received." Billy Graham
-
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Hebrews 1:1
"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17
Faith "ground or confidence"
"Faith is simply the channel through which God's grace to us is received." Billy Graham
The same circular, question-begging non-arguments as usual, then.
-
That is exactly it, Len. There is a difference between delusion and illusion and it seems that our understanding of our world is illusory. We can only operate as though everything is how it appears but we cannot demonstrate that everything is as it seems, and that includes your ideas about the universe 'continuing'.
Why? I saw nothing in that article to suggest that the universe won't continue in it's course.
The article addresses the belief that what you think you see around you is what it appears to be. The article does not address the issue of time. What does 'run its course' mean?
You have faith that 'run its course' has meaning - that there is even a course for the universe to run. It's just a concept.
-
That is exactly it, Len. There is a difference between delusion and illusion and it seems that our understanding of our world is illusory. We can only operate as though everything is how it appears but we cannot demonstrate that everything is as it seems, and that includes your ideas about the universe 'continuing'.
Why? I saw nothing in that article to suggest that the universe won't continue in it's course.
The article addresses the belief that what you think you see around you is what it appears to be. The article does not address the issue of time. What does 'run its course' mean?
You have faith that 'run its course' has meaning - that there is even a course for the universe to run. It's just a concept.
Well put.
There is also no way of knowing whether the universe needs to be maintained or indeed is at an equilibrium...if not the universe could ''collapse'' or whether a new universe could suddenly appear within the same space as this one.
-
The article addresses the belief that what you think you see around you is what it appears to be. The article does not address the issue of time. What does 'run its course' mean?
You have faith that 'run its course' has meaning - that there is even a course for the universe to run. It's just a concept.
In the same way as we look forward to tomorrow, and what we plan to do. What do you suggest, that there is no point? It's just a concept?
I'm sorry, Rhi, but none of that makes any sense to me.
-
Can you name an intense religious hallucination.(please don't say St Pauls conversion).
Is this aimed at me or torridon?
-
And how would you know to whom it applies?
By reportage of the content of the hallucinations. DMT in particular is notable for giving rise to hallucinations of hard to describe or define beings - humanoid beings - perceived to be otherworldly. Which could, depending on your prior worldview/belief system, be interpreted as angels, etc.
So, if one is a atheist, drug-craving or not, how might those interpretations be triggered?
-
The same circular, question-begging non-arguments as usual, then.
You'e clearly a very good virtual teacher, Shaker. ;)
-
The same circular, question-begging non-arguments as usual, then.
You'e clearly a very good virtual teacher, Shaker. ;)
I wouldn't think so - I've been trying to tell you for weeks on end that the negative proof fallacy/argument from/appeal to ignorance is something you shouldn't be employing, yet you still consistently do it.
-
Christian faith is not what Rhi or Sriram suggest it is. What don't you get about that Shaker? The Bible is clear on what Christian faith is. How can one argue about what Christian faith is when the Bible is clear? So yes, there is no argument about what Christian faith is except by those that are clueless, yourself being the best example of that.
"I prayed for faith and thought that some day faith would come down and strike me like lightning. But faith did not seem to come. One day I read in the tenth chapter of Romans, "faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God"
I had up to this time closed my Bible and prayed for faith. I now opened my Bible and began to study, and faith has been growing ever since." DL Moody
-
"I've been trying to tell you for weeks on end..."
Obviously we have a very low regard for what you try and tell us Shaker. And if you were smart you would also have a low regard for what you have to tell others.
-
Some people are simply incapable of rational thought - sad, but there it is.
-
Some people are simply incapable of rational thought - sad, but there it is.
Yes, but keep trying; it might come to you one day. :D
-
The article addresses the belief that what you think you see around you is what it appears to be. The article does not address the issue of time. What does 'run its course' mean?
You have faith that 'run its course' has meaning - that there is even a course for the universe to run. It's just a concept.
In the same way as we look forward to tomorrow, and what we plan to do. What do you suggest, that there is no point? It's just a concept?
I'm sorry, Rhi, but none of that makes any sense to me.
No, of course there is a point. But physicists dispute whether time exists, or if it dies exist whether it bears any resemblance to how we perceive it.
And aside from the issue of whether there is time, why does the universe have to have a 'course'? What is that? These are all concepts that are useful in making sense of our existence but there's no certainty this is 'reality'.
-
Yes Shaker and your posts are the leading example of incapable. There it is!
-
Some people are simply incapable of rational thought - sad, but there it is.
And of course that affliction can and does impact on thousands of people, both those with no faith and those with faith. As such, I'm not sure it has any relevance to this issue.
-
...
I'm not pretending to understand any of that scientific stuff, but I can't see how it suggests that everything is a delusion ... it just seems to be saying that we don't see it as we think we do.
But surely that is completely unimportant ... we can only operate according to the way things seem to us, whether it's correct or not.
Well, quite, but that demonstrates "faith" doesn't it? The way things seem to you and what sense you make of them, what you take as "self evident", depends on what processing you already have in place to pick through and organise them.
-
Of course we cannot verify the nature of the experience of long dead people. It has been noted for instance that the conversion of St Paul is consistent with the symptomology of epilepsy, which often involves intense religious hallucinations. That would be another thread of course, but it should caution us against putting too much faith in the claims and resulting teachings of individuals, especially long dead ones.
The danger with this kind of critique is that we feel that we can't learn from history; not merely ancient history but even recent history.
I can see that, although as a rule of thumb we need to apply a more sceptical attitude to documents from ancient times. As an example of the banality of taking ancient writings at face value, Adolf Hitler naively took seriously the accounts of Tacitus regarding the Aryans and this fed his obsession with germanic supremacy leading to the horrors of WWII. Yet modern scholars now regard these histories as fiction, Tacitus was essentially writing fiction, or at most generous, second hand or third hand accounts presented up as eye witness testimony.
-
Well, quite, but that demonstrates "faith" doesn't it? The way things seem to you and what sense you make of them, what you take as "self evident", depends on what processing you already have in place to pick through and organise them.
Well, the 'faith' as you call it is simply acting the way that seems most appropriate to me. I don't follow somebody else's dictates.
-
Hi everyone,
The point I am making is quite simple.
1. We know from scientific investigations that the unconscious (or subconscious...I am not splitting hairs here) is very much present in all humans (likely also in animals of course).
2. The unconscious is considered as much larger and much more powerful than the conscious mind.
3. However, our sense of self and self-awareness is linked only to the conscious mind. We are normally completely unaware of the unconscious.
4. We have no idea what the unconscious is or how it functions. We are not likely to know with any degree of accuracy.
5. Earlier, the unconscious was only thought of as a memory bank where repressed memories and detailed memories of events that the conscious mind is unaware of ....were stored. In other words, it was thought of only as an extension of the conscious mind. As an appendage or assistant.
6. In recent times we have seen that the unconscious mind is the real decision maker rather than the conscious mind. It also has a key role in the placebo effect and thereby affects our health in many ways. (check the references I have given in reply no 6 above). It is always awake as we have seen in cases of somnambulism.
7. The unconscious mind could have several layers with memory being only one level. Creative aspects, protective aspects, decision making, forecasting, environmental awareness, link with the eco-system and its processes, enabling evolutionary adaptations....and many other functions could also be a part of the unconscious mind. Jung talked of a collective unconscious. It could be much bigger than we can even imagine today.
8. Now coming to the controversial bit....from ancient times people have known that we have inside ourselves a wise, knowledgeable, observant, powerful, intelligent 'mind' which controls and guides our lives. We have called it by different names...such as spirit, soul, atma, Higher Self and so on. All these could refer to what we today call the unconscious.
9. When people have faith in an all powerful being...what really are they doing? Faith is an awareness of the unconscious....its power and its workings... as also the relative helplessness of the conscious mind. Not having a clear idea of what it is or how it works...but being subject to its authority and decisions.....makes the situation complex....calling for faith rather than knowledge. Real Faith, in other words, is an acknowledgement of the unconscious mind and its authority.
10. Of course, everyone cannot have the same level of awareness of the unconscious as some people can have. Only a small minority will be capable of this direct awareness of the unconscious on a day to day basis. The more the conscious mind is disciplined the more the awareness of the unconscious.
11. For the vast majority... accepting the teachings of the minority would be enough. The minority who teach the majority such matters would obviously base it on the local culture, legends, myths, social norms, emotions and the intellectual level of the people.
Just some thoughts.
Cheers.
Sriram
-
Now coming to the controversial bit....from ancient times people have known that we have inside ourselves a wise, knowledgeable, observant, powerful, intelligent 'mind' which controls and guides our lives.
They haven't known anything of the kind, they simply dreamed it up.
-
The article addresses the belief that what you think you see around you is what it appears to be. The article does not address the issue of time. What does 'run its course' mean?
You have faith that 'run its course' has meaning - that there is even a course for the universe to run. It's just a concept.
In the same way as we look forward to tomorrow, and what we plan to do. What do you suggest, that there is no point? It's just a concept?
I'm sorry, Rhi, but none of that makes any sense to me.
No, of course there is a point. But physicists dispute whether time exists, or if it dies exist whether it bears any resemblance to how we perceive it.
And aside from the issue of whether there is time, why does the universe have to have a 'course'? What is that? These are all concepts that are useful in making sense of our existence but there's no certainty this is 'reality'.
I'm sorry, Rhi, but I see no point in discussing this any further, since it gets us nowhere.
I will simply continue to accept that things are what they seem to be, because otherwise I wouldn't have a clue on how to live my life.
-
Hi everyone,
The point I am making is quite simple:
...
Points 1 -9 various speculative ideas with no underlying verifiable model.
10. Of course, everyone cannot have the same level of awareness of the unconscious as some people can have. Only a small minority will be capable of this direct awareness of the unconscious on a day to day basis. The more the conscious mind is disciplined the more the awareness of the unconscious.
11. For the vast majority... accepting the teachings of the minority would be enough. The minority who teach the majority such matters would obviously base it on the local culture, legends, myths, social norms, emotions and the intellectual level of the people.
...
Since there is no way of confirming who has a level of awareness of the unconscious or not (assuming for now that this is important) - this is an argument for self declared gurus to be allowed to exploit and defraud the masses.
-
Jesus Christ...
How would you describe his faith?
He made a statement....
Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go
So given what you have already stated Sriram how do you figure Christ in to your take on blind faith?
-
Jesus Christ...
How would you describe his faith?
He made a statement....
Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go
So given what you have already stated Sriram how do you figure Christ in to your take on blind faith?
And that statement means what exactly?
-
Jesus Christ...
How would you describe his faith?
He made a statement....
Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go
So given what you have already stated Sriram how do you figure Christ in to your take on blind faith?
And that statement means what exactly?
Thought you knew Christianity and understood. Seems you know absolutely NOTHING as your reply confirms... Cast not thy pearls before the swine...
-
Jesus Christ...
How would you describe his faith?
He made a statement....
Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go
So given what you have already stated Sriram how do you figure Christ in to your take on blind faith?
And that statement means what exactly?
Thought you knew Christianity and understood. Seems you know absolutely NOTHING as your reply confirms... Cast not thy pearls before the swine...
More garbage from poor Sass, who just doesn't have a clue! ;D
-
Sriram, I have to admire the dogged persistence with which you plug away at the existence of something 'other'. You seem to have a stronger than usual need for it to exist. Why is that, do you think?
(That's a genuine question ... I have no idea of why it might be)
Perhaps he has a need to make sure that people appreciate that such an 'other' exists, contrary to the opinion of some on this board. As such, I'm not sure that its a case of his having a need for it to exist, let alone a 'stronger than usual' one.
-
I don't "ignore" it, but like all specialised knowledge, it has little or no impact on our day to day life.
Again, I'd disagree, with both halves of this response, LJ. Not only does it have a major impact on our day-to-day life, but suggesting that it doesn't means that you are ignoring it.
-
Sriram, I have to admire the dogged persistence with which you plug away at the existence of something 'other'. You seem to have a stronger than usual need for it to exist. Why is that, do you think?
(That's a genuine question ... I have no idea of why it might be)
Perhaps he has a need to make sure that people appreciate that such an 'other' exists, contrary to the opinion of some on this board.
Why, when absolutely no rationale or evidence is offered?
-
We cannot control our sub-conscious, by definition!
But we can inform that sub-conscious by dint of what we believe.
-
Why, when absolutely no rationale or evidence is offered?
Is that what you call the material that has been pesented, on this board alone, over the years?
-
Why, when absolutely no rationale or evidence is offered?
Is that what you call the material that has been pesented, on this board alone, over the years?
Yes.
-
We cannot control our sub-conscious, by definition!
But we can inform that sub-conscious by dint of what we believe.
You can only believe what your subconscious allows.
-
Yes.
So, its a subjective opinion (its what you regard the material to be) as opposed to anything more objective.
-
You can only believe what your subconscious allows.
So, what happens to those who change their beliefs; does their sub-conscious change first, or does it change only in response to the change in belief? After all, the latter is often a mental process
-
If, as you claim, Sriram has a need to make people appreciate that some 'other' thing exists then he would do well to provide a coherent definition of what this 'other' actually is and then some shareable, testable evidence demonstrating its existence that everybody else can see. That seems objective enough to me.
-
You can only believe what your subconscious allows.
So, what happens to those who change their beliefs; does their sub-conscious change first, or does it change only in response to the change in belief? After all, the latter is often a mental process
If, as we are told, our subconscious decides on an action before we consciously are aware of it, then it's all up to the subconscious. (Which is also a mental process, by the way.)
-
8. Now coming to the controversial bit....from ancient times people have known that we have inside ourselves a wise, knowledgeable, observant, powerful, intelligent 'mind' which controls and guides our lives. We have called it by different names...such as spirit, soul, atma, Higher Self and so on. All these could refer to what we today call the unconscious.
9. When people have faith in an all powerful being...what really are they doing? Faith is an awareness of the unconscious....its power and its workings... as also the relative helplessness of the conscious mind. Not having a clear idea of what it is or how it works...but being subject to its authority and decisions.....makes the situation complex....calling for faith rather than knowledge. Real Faith, in other words, is an acknowledgement of the unconscious mind and its authority.
10. Of course, everyone cannot have the same level of awareness of the unconscious as some people can have. Only a small minority will be capable of this direct awareness of the unconscious on a day to day basis. The more the conscious mind is disciplined the more the awareness of the unconscious.
11. For the vast majority... accepting the teachings of the minority would be enough. The minority who teach the majority such matters would obviously base it on the local culture, legends, myths, social norms, emotions and the intellectual level of the people.
I think to some extent you are redefining terms,like faith, to suit your purposes.To most, faith means putting one's trust in something, a person or an idea. To put trust in your own subconscious is equivalent to trusting your instincts, which is OK in some circumstances, not so good in others. Your subconscious mind is like a repository of your deeper often subliminal hopes and fears, that is no guarantee of there being some sort of objective transcendental truth down there, all humans are fallible and subconscious mind is no different in that respect. Decluttering your conscious mind might allow you to remember what you really want, but that is no guarantee of wisdom or intelligence.
-
Hi everyone,
There is usually lot of demand for evidence...evidence of something other than normal consciousness. The unconscious mind is the evidence. Lot depends on ones programming of course. (refer to the 'evidence' thread).
In recent years it has been found that the unconscious mind takes decisions even before the conscious mind is aware of it. Placebo effects have been linked to the unconscious mind. The unconscious mind has been found to make the most optimal decisions for ones future. (Just go to Science Daily site and search for 'unconscious mind'....there are plenty of articles).
Therefore, as far as the conscious mind is concerned, there is now objective evidence of a subtle inner intelligence that literally guides us and does things that the conscious mind is not capable of.
So... when we read references to 'inner truth', inner guide', Higher self, 'God within', 'know thyself'....and so on, it is clearly connected to the unconscious mind.
How far research on the unconscious will go and how long it will all take...we do not know. What the exact nature of the unconscious mind is...we do not know. The conscious mind is too small and too dependent on the unconscious mind for it to know much. (Anyone who imagines that he 'knows' the nature of the unconscious mind...'its only this'...'its only that'...and so on, is making a big mistake).
Of course, mere articles read from a science magazine would not be enough to convince many people. Every person should be able to notice the fact that the unconscious mind is really and truly alive and active inside him and be able to relate directly to its workings.
Once this happens, the person knows that there really is something (the 'unconscious mind' is only a term after all....and doesn't explain anything) inside him that he can rely on more than on external things.
After this, anyone, even an atheist, could conceivably curb conscious efforts at decision making and leave matters to the unconscious mind. Even regards health matters he could start depending to a large extent on the unconscious mind to prevent/cure his ailments. This is faith! I don't see it as different from faith in a God.
Cheers.
Sriram
-
After this, anyone, even an atheist, could conceivably curb conscious efforts at decision making and leave matters to the unconscious mind. Even regards health matters he could start depending to a large extent on the unconscious mind to prevent/cure his ailments. This is faith! I don't see it as different from faith in a God.
Cheers.
Sriram
How on earth do we "curb conscious efforts at decision making and leave matters to the unconscious mind", Sriram?
-
After this, anyone, even an atheist, could conceivably curb conscious efforts at decision making and leave matters to the unconscious mind. Even regards health matters he could start depending to a large extent on the unconscious mind to prevent/cure his ailments. This is faith! I don't see it as different from faith in a God.
Cheers.
Sriram
How on earth do we "curb conscious efforts at decision making and leave matters to the unconscious mind", Sriram?
It's what we call 'gut feeling', Len.
-
It's what we call 'gut feeling', Len.
OIC. Well, when we can't make up our minds to do/not do something, I suppose it's the only way to go, isn't it (apart from do nothing)?
How you would measure the efficacy of such actions I can't imagine, but I would guess it is 50/50.
-
After this, anyone, even an atheist, could conceivably curb conscious efforts at decision making and leave matters to the unconscious mind. Even regards health matters he could start depending to a large extent on the unconscious mind to prevent/cure his ailments. This is faith! I don't see it as different from faith in a God.
Sometimes it is reasonable to go with a gut instinct, but not always. There is a reason why we have conscious mind, it must serve essential purpose, so we cannot just throw it out as if it were useless. Also, subconscious mind is not infallible, in fact it is the repository of all our prejudices and mental pathologies, apart from anything else. There might be wisdom in getting in touch with deeper levels of yourself but that isn't a panacea for poor decision making. In exploring aspects of self we might come to understand things we wish we didn't know for instance.
-
Unfortunately my unconscious mind unreasonably keeps making me try and think things through logically! I suspect you have the same problem.
-
After this, anyone, even an atheist, could conceivably curb conscious efforts at decision making and leave matters to the unconscious mind. Even regards health matters he could start depending to a large extent on the unconscious mind to prevent/cure his ailments. This is faith! I don't see it as different from faith in a God.
Sometimes it is reasonable to go with a gut instinct, but not always. There is a reason why we have conscious mind, it must serve essential purpose, so we cannot just throw it out as if it were useless. Also, subconscious mind is not infallible, in fact it is the repository of all our prejudices and mental pathologies, apart from anything else. There might be wisdom in getting in touch with deeper levels of yourself but that isn't a panacea for poor decision making. In exploring aspects of self we might come to understand things we wish we didn't know for instance.
I think there needs to be some clarification as to what 'unconscious mind' is supposed to be and how does it differ from 'subconscious mind' and 'conscious mind'. One way might be to view the conscious mind like a lamp which can be directed as a focused beam or expanded to illuminate a wider periphery. The subconscious could be likened to an accumulation of past impressions which have either slipped beyond the threshold of illumination or have been suppressed beyond that threshold, but are capable of re-emerging into consciousness. The unconscious would represent that which has never been exposed to the light but has the potential to be so. As regards just having faith in the unconscious it sounds like blind faith in the unknown. It might be better to expand the illumination. As regards having faith in the subconscious, sometimes its inevitable e.g. where instinctive reactions are involved and survival depends upon it. Sometimes its undesirable e.g. where addictive behaviour is involved. As regards intuitions, I would suggest that they need checking in the cold light of day (consciousness).
-
Yes, good points there, I see more validity in your ideas than Sriram's.
-
My conscious mind(or, perhaps, my subconscious mind :) ) tells me that I like a lot of what you say in Mess.91, Ekim.
-
Sriram, if we could learn to listen and trust our intuition, once more, things in this world could be different. Intuition is the quiet voice against the demand of the ego. To go with one's intuition can at times seem not to make sense, but the end result can sometimes be surprisingly worthwhile.
There was a tv programme a few years ago about decision making and intuition that concluded we should learn to trust our intuition more. After all, we were given this ability for a reason.
-
Sriram, if we could learn to listen and trust our intuition, once more, things in this world could be different. Intuition is the quiet voice against the demand of the ego. To go with one's intuition can at times seem not to make sense, but the end result can sometimes be surprisingly worthwhile.
There was a tv programme a few years ago about decision making and intuition that concluded we should learn to trust our intuition more. After all, we were given this ability for a reason.
Hi SweetPea,
Yes...lot depends however on how powerful and dominant the ego sense is. If the sense of individuality is very strong the conscious mind will dominate and the power of the unconscious will be relatively less. If the sense of individuality is low...the unconscious mind and intuitive powers will be more.
Back again to the same old principle of controlling the ego and being humble!!! ;)
For everyone....I want to clarify that ....when I talk of the unconscious mind, inner quest and such matters, I am advocating what we Hindus think of as the Jnana marga or the Path of Wisdom. It is necessary that those who believe in following the Path of Devotion or the Path of Service, continue with it.
Everyone doesn't have to 'understand' reality the same way. Whatever works for each person!
Cheers.
Sriram
-
Sometimes it is reasonable to go with a gut instinct, but not always.
Precisely! The subconscious can just as well be wrong as can the conscious mind.
-
The defined set of ideas and dogma of any group of people arise from the culture and teachings of the original teacher (like Jesus or Moses). These get propagated as rigid ideas over a period of time...and could even get distorted over time. But they are originally based on real experiences of natural forces that exist in all of us.
The problem with this is that in Jesus' case, a lot of the 'defined set of ideas and dogma' did not arise from the culture in which Jesus grew up. In fact they didn't come from any culture before him.
Hope,
The unconscious/subconscious is present in everyone....but different people are able to realize it and access it to different degrees....depending on how spiritually evolved they are.
Jesus was probably one of the highly evolved persons who had this natural inclination and capacity to access the unconscious mind and go beyond it. He would have been able to sense the authority and power of the inner mind. He would have developed intuitive knowledge and understanding of life and its meaning.
This is what he taught to the other people in a manner relevant to them and their culture.....which in course of the centuries would have become a rigid and dogmatic religious teaching.
This is what I meant.
-
The defined set of ideas and dogma of any group of people arise from the culture and teachings of the original teacher (like Jesus or Moses). These get propagated as rigid ideas over a period of time...and could even get distorted over time. But they are originally based on real experiences of natural forces that exist in all of us.
The problem with this is that in Jesus' case, a lot of the 'defined set of ideas and dogma' did not arise from the culture in which Jesus grew up. In fact they didn't come from any culture before him.
Hope,
The unconscious/subconscious is present in everyone....but different people are able to realize it and access it to different degrees....depending on how spiritually evolved they are.
Jesus was probably one of the highly evolved persons who had this natural inclination and capacity to access the unconscious mind and go beyond it. He would have been able to sense the authority and power of the inner mind. He would have developed intuitive knowledge and understanding of life and its meaning.
This is what he taught to the other people in a manner relevant to them and their culture.....which in course of the centuries would have become a rigid and dogmatic religious teaching.
This is what I meant.
You seem to be labouring under a profound misunderstanding here; you seem to think of sub/un/conscious mind as some sort of virtuous place where all our nobler attributes reside. There's no evidence for that as far as I know. What will be down there, in terms of psyche, is deeper levels of your self, for want of a better word, deeper levels for better or worse. If you are a psychopath, the fundamental wells of that pathology reside permanently below the levels of our conscious awareness, occasionally surfacing into daylight through dysfunctional choices and behaviours. The subconscious has no guarantee of virtue.
-
The defined set of ideas and dogma of any group of people arise from the culture and teachings of the original teacher (like Jesus or Moses). These get propagated as rigid ideas over a period of time...and could even get distorted over time. But they are originally based on real experiences of natural forces that exist in all of us.
The problem with this is that in Jesus' case, a lot of the 'defined set of ideas and dogma' did not arise from the culture in which Jesus grew up. In fact they didn't come from any culture before him.
Hope,
The unconscious/subconscious is present in everyone....but different people are able to realize it and access it to different degrees....depending on how spiritually evolved they are.
Jesus was probably one of the highly evolved persons who had this natural inclination and capacity to access the unconscious mind and go beyond it. He would have been able to sense the authority and power of the inner mind. He would have developed intuitive knowledge and understanding of life and its meaning.
This is what he taught to the other people in a manner relevant to them and their culture.....which in course of the centuries would have become a rigid and dogmatic religious teaching.
This is what I meant.
You seem to be labouring under a profound misunderstanding here; you seem to think of sub/un/conscious mind as some sort of virtuous place where all our nobler attributes reside. There's no evidence for that as far as I know. What will be down there, in terms of psyche, is deeper levels of your self, for want of a better word, deeper levels for better or worse. If you are a psychopath, the fundamental wells of that pathology reside permanently below the levels of our conscious awareness, occasionally surfacing into daylight through dysfunctional choices and behaviours. The subconscious has no guarantee of virtue.
That's why various religions encourage consciously transcending the subconscious. The various analogies, like walking on the waters, flying the magic carpet, crossing a river, descending into hell and ascending into heaven may well symbolise this.
-
Sriram, I have to admire the dogged persistence with which you plug away at the existence of something 'other'. You seem to have a stronger than usual need for it to exist. Why is that, do you think?
(That's a genuine question ... I have no idea of why it might be)
Just go through the subconscious/unconscious thread.
I can still see no reason in that thread as to WHY you have such a strong need to pursue it.
Why do you have such a string need to deny it?
-
Why do you have such a string need to deny it?
I'm a stubborn old sod when it comes to evidence ... or lack of it. :)
I'll 'string' along with anything if I am presented with evidence. ;)
-
Why do you have such a string need to deny it?
I'm a stubborn old sod when it comes to evidence ... or lack of it. :)
I'll 'string' along with anything if I am presented with evidence. ;)
You just 'think' you are looking for evidence. Fact is that you are programmed not to see the evidence even if it stares you in the face.
-
Why do you have such a string need to deny it?
I'm a stubborn old sod when it comes to evidence ... or lack of it. :)
I'll 'string' along with anything if I am presented with evidence. ;)
You just 'think' you are looking for evidence. Fact is that you are programmed not to see the evidence even if it stares you in the face.
Got some evidence for that?
-
Why do you have such a string need to deny it?
I'm a stubborn old sod when it comes to evidence ... or lack of it. :)
I'll 'string' along with anything if I am presented with evidence. ;)
You just 'think' you are looking for evidence. Fact is that you are programmed not to see the evidence even if it stares you in the face.
Let's say rather that I am not so inclined to romantic ideas as you are. :)