RE: Philosophy
March 28, 2009 at 12:25 pm
(This post was last modified: March 28, 2009 at 12:26 pm by LukeMC.)
I think I'll address the OP.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4c43d/4c43db305705c2d6a92c222ba6f5576d7b3222d3" alt="Smile Smile"
I think it's safe for me to assume that being spiritually awake is the goal you propose. To achieve this, must you recognise your "place" and "meaning" in the universe, and feel your interconnectedness with it? What are the actual guidelines for achieving the goal? And why would somebody refuse to recognise their true nature? It seems to me that you're implying there is a correct conclusion (accepting your god, etc) and that anyone who refuses to see this god is "awake but refusing to see". I could dispute so many implications and finer details of this idea, but first you must clarify your guidelines for achieving spiritual awareness?
Now lets get into some more detail and put your ideas to the test. One of us should surely learn something from the exchange.
(March 27, 2009 at 9:50 am)dagda Wrote: This is my personal philosophy/theology. Make of it what you will.I can agree with this premise only if you extend it to say "a prison from which we cannot escape". Reality encompasses all that is real. To leave the prison is to leave reality, and to leave reality is to enter a plane which isn't real and therefore doesn't exist. You cannot do that for such a plane wouldn't be there (by definition).
-Reality is a prison.
(March 27, 2009 at 9:50 am)dagda Wrote: -reality is an illusionI'll accept this in a round-about way. Many of our perceptions of reality are indeed illusions; simplified models or arbitrary concepts. However, when you state reality is an illusion, I cannot be entirely sure of what you mean. If reality is all of that which is real, and you go on to claim that what is real is an illusion, you could be sayign one of two things: either our perception of what is real is an illusion, or reality as an entity is an illusion. The latter premise is a contradiction as it states being real is an illusion, therefore "real things" aren't really there, and therefore don't exist and therefore are not real. In that case I'll imagine you make the former claim; that our perception of reality is an illusion: nothing is as it seems and it's all an evolved construct of our brains trying to put together pieces of a puzzle which don't accurately reflect what really is. Such a debate is worthy of its own thread, as there are so many things that could be said about it. I find it really interesting
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4c43d/4c43db305705c2d6a92c222ba6f5576d7b3222d3" alt="Smile Smile"
(March 27, 2009 at 9:50 am)dagda Wrote: -Evil is caused by ignoranceAlso deserves its own thread. Do you define evil as that which hinders the welfare of humans? Of animals? Of all life (this includes bacteria)? Of our entire ecosystem? I cannot agree nor disagree on the causation of evil without having your definition of what constitutes such a characteristic.
(March 27, 2009 at 9:50 am)dagda Wrote: -there are four types of people in the world; the spiritualy asleep;the spiritualy blind; those that are awake but refuse to see and the spiritualy awake.So, we have those who are ignorant of spirituality entirely (asleep), those who want to see but can't (blind), those who choose not to see (awake but refuse) and those who... Wait, could you clarify the last one? I'm guessing you meant to imply that the spiritually awake can and DO see their spirituality. Okay, I agree. Now riddle me this: what does it mean to be spiritual and which of the 4 categories are the best?
I think it's safe for me to assume that being spiritually awake is the goal you propose. To achieve this, must you recognise your "place" and "meaning" in the universe, and feel your interconnectedness with it? What are the actual guidelines for achieving the goal? And why would somebody refuse to recognise their true nature? It seems to me that you're implying there is a correct conclusion (accepting your god, etc) and that anyone who refuses to see this god is "awake but refusing to see". I could dispute so many implications and finer details of this idea, but first you must clarify your guidelines for achieving spiritual awareness?
(March 27, 2009 at 9:50 am)dagda Wrote: -there are three gods; Satan, Jehovah and the One, Source of All.And now it gets dissapointing. What are these three gods, where did they come from, where are they now and how did you come to realise they exist in the way you understand them to?
(March 27, 2009 at 9:50 am)dagda Wrote: - the Christ was the One's messanger, sent to reveal the truth. Christ was not the One's son any more than we are.So this "One" god has interest in our personal lives. Interesting. Could you explain why you feel this to be true, and why this god cares about us looking upon another with lust? I suppose this follows on from the last set of questions I asked. Explain your gods.
(March 27, 2009 at 9:50 am)dagda Wrote: -Reincarnation is the fate of souls which have not learned to see.What are souls? How did you come to the conclusion that such entities exist? How did you come to the conclusion that these entities must learn to "see" things in order to avoid being recycled?
(March 27, 2009 at 9:50 am)dagda Wrote: -the light of the One resides within us all (good old fashioned pantheism there).I'll consider this to be poetic mumbo-jumbo. I'd say the same sort of thing for the universe: "the essense of the universe resides within us all". It's poetic nonsense which serves nothing more than an uplifting view of a situation. I won't dispute your claim until you've told me about this "One" though, although I can't see this point being important.
(March 27, 2009 at 9:50 am)dagda Wrote: The list goes on, but that is my central philosophy to life.Thanks for sharing
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4c43d/4c43db305705c2d6a92c222ba6f5576d7b3222d3" alt="Smile Smile"