Does anyone want to receive Spiritual Enlightenment?
- Thread starter New Age United
- Start date
tyler.durden
Well-Known Member
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW REALITY IS MANIFESTED,YOUR 'DESTINY' WILL NO LONGER BE IN THE HANDS OF THE ELITE .. WATCH
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=274643
Those who are awake (or ready to awaken) will get it
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=274643
Those who are awake (or ready to awaken) will get it
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
Intuition has nothing to do with logic. Regardless of how many times you mislabel something, it
doesn't make it correct. If you are going to have rational discourse with rational people, we need to use the terms we're throwing around correctly.
Thanks, Socrates. You didn't care to put that one in quotes?
Both of those aspects of your consciousness are still both 'you'. Descartes was talking about the fact that you are even thinking means you have to exist. You can doubt your body, your friends, your family, but it's not possible to doubt your own inner dialogue.
I don't know what New age bullshit you've been letting your self get sucked in by, but you're a whack job.
I think it's more likely Jesus didn't know the answer, if he even existed.
New Age United
Well-Known Member
I am sorry people I really am, that was pretty stupid, that is true stupidity, I try to keep the Ego out of this as much as possible but it is hard it really is, do you see just how counter productive the Ego really is, that is why it is so important to keep it out of Philosophy.
I am only trying to Enlighten you, I am only trying to Awaken the Genius in You, I Know it IS there, YOU are the KNOWER of all things, you really are, you just forgot, you just have to remember who you are, you are an Immortal Genius, you just are.
"Everything that I have told you is not for me but for you alone"
Peace,Bliss, laughter and Love that is all that fills you, let everything else just fly away, get outta here lol!!!!!!
If the Light does not have the power to change the world then nothing does
I am only trying to Enlighten you, I am only trying to Awaken the Genius in You, I Know it IS there, YOU are the KNOWER of all things, you really are, you just forgot, you just have to remember who you are, you are an Immortal Genius, you just are.
"Everything that I have told you is not for me but for you alone"
Peace,Bliss, laughter and Love that is all that fills you, let everything else just fly away, get outta here lol!!!!!!
If the Light does not have the power to change the world then nothing does
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
You will awaken only when you realize this one important yet very simple thing...
You Could Be Wrong...
Well there is no 'could' about it.
New Age United, for your info, you've come across as new age wishy washy twat, a magical thinker who talks utter rubbish and is arrogant with it but everybody is laughing at you and some may even feel a little sorry for you too.
And that's not an ad hominem but an empirical observation. I'm being honest, it's best thing I can give you, my honesty.
You've told everybody they are fools and make yourself out to be some oracle of wisdom but you are talking shite man, just so you know.
You claim to have some kind of esoteric knowledge and knowledge is demonstrable but all you've furnished is white noise.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
I'm not convinced you understand what Philosophy is.
First, you need to prove enlightenment exists. Then you need to prove you are enlightened. After you've done that, you need to prove that there is a 'genius' in everyone. Then you need to prove that everyone actually 'knows everything' and has only forgotten. Then after all those feats, you would have to prove your schtick about immortality.
Only then, will anyone with any form of critical thinking faculties lend any credence to what you say.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
[video=youtube;AtB-t4kBItM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtB-t4kBItM[/video]
NietzscheKeen
Well-Known Member
The Ego is why 95% of people get out of bed everyday. It's not necessarily a bad thing, it does have the potential to become repellant to others though; depending on your definition.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Being esoteric is what is bad, not acknowledging the ego
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...how so?
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
[video=youtube;g0B-cUSX57Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0B-cUSX57Q[/video]
New Age United
Well-Known Member
I very well could be, that is a very good point, but even if I was, still it would not be important, but that is a very good point
"This is how I can tell that Stephen Hawkings is not a genius, he never speaks about the Truth, pie in the sky ideas, logical possibilities yes, brilliant most certainly, but completely useless, however I must add that he is fulfilling a great purpose, showing people that which is not Truth"
If Stephen Hawkings heard this, all he would do is laugh, then he would shed a tear for humanity and get back to work lol!!!!!!!
If you are familiar with his work you should be able to prove me wrong in the blink of an eye
The answer is very simple, it always is
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
You are only making assertions, not arguments. All that is needed is a counter assertion.
"This is how I can tell that Stephen Hawkings is a genius, he speaks about the Truth, important ideas, logical possibilities yes, brilliant most certainly, and completely useful, however I must add that he is fulfilling a great purpose, showing people that which is Truth"
You've just been proved wrong to the same degree as you proved yourself right.
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them." -Thomas Jefferson
NietzscheKeen
Well-Known Member
Dear New Age,
Well, there is a difference between a theory and an assertion of "truth". Philosophy plays a big part in the sciences. You really, in my opinion, can't have one without the other. It seems to me that some of the greatest scientists, politicians, theorists of any kind, could also be considered philosophers as well. You can't develop a theory without understanding logic; your logic has to be based on the best information that we have at the present time. You can develop theories about anything really, but unless it's based in some observable reality... it won't be given much credence and is almost certainly bound to be wrong.
I really think you'd enjoy and get a lot out of reading some works by Karl Popper. He was not without his criticisms, and I disagree with a few of his "larger" views, but I do think it would be a great introduction to the Philosophy of Science, Epistemology, and Philosphy of Religion for you since many of your views... at least from my point of view, do not seem to be at odds with much of what he believed. Even though he has his critics, he still is respected in the field of philosophy and could most certainly help you build a framework for your ideas.
Anyone else have any recommended reading? I'm interested myself.
Well, there is a difference between a theory and an assertion of "truth". Philosophy plays a big part in the sciences. You really, in my opinion, can't have one without the other. It seems to me that some of the greatest scientists, politicians, theorists of any kind, could also be considered philosophers as well. You can't develop a theory without understanding logic; your logic has to be based on the best information that we have at the present time. You can develop theories about anything really, but unless it's based in some observable reality... it won't be given much credence and is almost certainly bound to be wrong.
I really think you'd enjoy and get a lot out of reading some works by Karl Popper. He was not without his criticisms, and I disagree with a few of his "larger" views, but I do think it would be a great introduction to the Philosophy of Science, Epistemology, and Philosphy of Religion for you since many of your views... at least from my point of view, do not seem to be at odds with much of what he believed. Even though he has his critics, he still is respected in the field of philosophy and could most certainly help you build a framework for your ideas.
Anyone else have any recommended reading? I'm interested myself.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
...I have a question. He says in the beginning of the video 'spookiness'. Why is supernatural always associated with spooky? Something other than natural seems spooky?
NietzscheKeen
Well-Known Member
Spook
Noun
1. Informal. a ghost; specter.
Ghost·ly Adjective 1. of, characteristic of, or resembling a ghost; phantasmal; spectral.
2. Literary. Spiritual.
I believe he is meaning "spookiness" as synonymous with "spiritual" not as in eerie or scary.
Noun
1. Informal. a ghost; specter.
Ghost·ly Adjective 1. of, characteristic of, or resembling a ghost; phantasmal; spectral.
2. Literary. Spiritual.
I believe he is meaning "spookiness" as synonymous with "spiritual" not as in eerie or scary.
NietzscheKeen
Well-Known Member
Most people have the wrong idea about philosophy because they've only been exposed to "sitcom" philosophy or the Intro to Philosophy class in college which, as I'm sure you'll agree, barely resembles the "real" philosophy classes you get into AFTER taking the intro class. I think Logic, Ethics, Religions, and Scientific Method should be required classes for EVERYONE in order to graduate HIGHSCHOOL.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
...I have a question. He says in the beginning of the video 'spookiness'. Why is supernatural always associated with spooky? Something other than natural seems spooky?
Because most people find that which they don't understand to be unnerving. The term they often use to describe the feeling happens to be "spooky". Some would simply say "startling".
Can you think of an example of the supernatural which doesn't seem spooky or startling?
