Kite High
Well-Known Member
and that should have ended this dumbass thread...jus sayinnow go look up dmt, the pineal gland, and there relation to nde's
i experienced a creator like being of energy as well
and that should have ended this dumbass thread...jus sayinnow go look up dmt, the pineal gland, and there relation to nde's
i experienced a creator like being of energy as well
and that should have ended this dumbass thread...jus sayin
and that should have ended this dumbass thread...jus sayin
and that should have ended this dumbass thread...jus sayin
Just to play devil's advocate and to test your debate skills, I propose that Science can be a tool of evil as easily as a force of good. Science has revealed many ways in which we could destroy ourselves, it's our collective conscious that caused us to use it for progress. The moral framework for this conscious has been convicted and reinforced by religion. Without these values in place to counter natural shortcomings like hubris, greed, wrath, and sloth, science would destroy our world.
I appreciate the opportunity. Science may never be used for anything sans objective knowledge. TECHNOLOGY on the other, can be used for "Evil". (I assume you mean actions which violate human rights)
It was not the discovery of atomic sciences that killed, but rather little boy and the fat man.
It was not the discovery of black powder that killed, but rather the cannon.
Our destructive nature is ever present. (I personally laugh at people who propose we will be around to witness Type 3 technologies) It is our nature which takes the results of science, and chooses cannons over fireworks and Bombs over medicine.
...in drug-induced states of awareness, are there familiar 'signposts' for all who participate? Does everyone see the same imagery?
Here's a doosy. I contend that Schizoid behavior is the next evolutionary step. By removing our emotional connection with our universe, we become capable of more. Our need for emotions has expired. The model has changed. We will adapt, or die.
ingenious thoughts but there is a problemHere's a doosy. I contend that Schizoid behavior is the next evolutionary step. By removing our emotional connection with our universe, we become capable of more. Our need for emotions has expired. The model has changed. We will adapt, or die.
I appreciate the opportunity. Science may never be used for anything sans objective knowledge. TECHNOLOGY on the other, can be used for "Evil". (I assume you mean actions which violate human rights)
It was not the discovery of atomic sciences that killed, but rather little boy and the fat man.
It was not the discovery of black powder that killed, but rather the cannon.
Our destructive nature is ever present. (I personally laugh at people who propose we will be around to witness Type 3 technologies) It is our nature which takes the results of science, and chooses cannons over fireworks and Bombs over medicine.
atomic sciences killed madam curie
I appreciate the opportunity. Science may never be used for anything sans objective knowledge. TECHNOLOGY on the other, can be used for "Evil". (I assume you mean actions which violate human rights)
It was not the discovery of atomic sciences that killed, but rather little boy and the fat man.
It was not the discovery of black powder that killed, but rather the cannon.
Our destructive nature is ever present. (I personally laugh at people who propose we will be around to witness Type 3 technologies) It is our nature which takes the results of science, and chooses cannons over fireworks and Bombs over medicine.
No. Imagine Claudio Naranjo's shock when Ott (?) said, "sorry, no jaguars". It was just another chip in the crumbling edifice of Jung. cn
Exactly, we are destructive selfish creatures by nature, yet we tend to use science for constructive and altruistic applications. This can only be because religion has engraved in us the values which deter narcissism and foster charity.
(this is of course BS, but you've yet to tell me why)
...Jung's crumbling edifice was his area of study, man
...seriously though, in introspective 'religion' there are signposts that people witness. Albeit not exactly the same, but carry the same connotations.
It is the blind progress that leads to the discovery of germs, how they work, how they effect us, and how to control them. Why some choose to help, and others to hate, is a matter of environment. Nature VS Nurture. I find it interesting that an overwhelming number of scientists and professors are Atheists. Does a greater understanding of the universe expell religion? Or does religion prohibit a greater understanding of the universe? I digress.It was not the discovery of germs which reduced sickness, but the intentions of those to spread the knowledge and the desire to help others. Science allows us to progress fishing tactics to the point of depleting the oceans, morals tell us it isn't right. Morals were given to us by religion long before science. Science fuels blind progress, religion keeps gluttony in check.
Exactly, we are destructive selfish creatures by nature, yet we tend to use science for constructive and altruistic applications. This can only be because religion has engraved in us the values which deter narcissism and foster charity.
(this is of course BS, but you've yet to tell me why)
I think part of the trouble is that there seems to be a sort of cognitive continuum between one signpost and the next and ... ultimately its opposite. Imo it's one of the things that makes interpreting dreams and visions so fraught. It's impossible to objectively rule if a vision-element is In or Out in terms of corresponding to a signpost. It's a subset of the problem of falsifiability. cn