The Universe Is All That Exists

[ellion]

therefore, to answer your question, nothing exists outside or anterior to existence.

this doesnt answer my question. you had already stated this fact in your original post and then in your first reply to me, but it was not what i asked you. the real question that you failed to Percieve was

a question, does anything exist 'outside' or 'anterior' to your perception of existence?

actually you answered my question indirectly by twice failing to recognize what i was really asking you. maybe Falterdperception would be a more suitable title.

by using this vague definition of god you are correct, if your definition of god is existence itself. my point is there is no need for belief in the supernatural. it is not only superfluous but an incoherent theory

my vague definition of god wasnt really a definition of god it was more a definition of existence, but i suppose how it is read depends on perspective.

a bracelet can be made of gold but gold is not a bracelet.


my point is the supernatural is superflous and incoherent to you because you fail to perceive or comprehend it.

 

[stefan]

my point is the supernatural is superflous and incoherent to you because you fail to perceive or comprehend it.

how can anybody, not know of the supernatural, we all have an imagination.
I think, he percieve and comprehend the supernatural perfectly well, but does'nt let his imagination run away with him.

 

[ellion]

how can anybody, not know of the supernatural, we all have an imagination.
I think, he percieve and comprehend the supernatural perfectly well, but does'nt let his imagination run away with him.

if you are saying the supernatural is in your imagination?
then it is not the supernatural, that is your imagination.

 

[ellion]

alteredperception,
here is the other question you failed to perceive;

why is it true that there cannot be an infinite number of antecedent causes if the universe has always existed then causes have always existed. why do you say an eternal universe can exist but infinite causes cannot?

 

[stefan]

if you are saying the supernatural is in your imagination?

where else would the invisible reside.

then it is not the supernatural, that is your imagination.

yes the supernatural is in my imagination, I accept that, as it is in everypersons imagination.

(supernatural:
adj : not existing in nature or subject to explanation according to natural laws; not physical or material;")

Supernatural forces can not be shown to exist by the scientific method. Supernatural claims assert phenomena beyond the realm of current scientific understanding, which are often in direct conflict with current scientific theory.
therefore it must be of the imagination.
the imaginary, and the invisible are of the same ilk.
The supernatural is also a topic in various genres of fiction, fiction is of the imagination.

it seems to me your are letting your imagination run away with you.

 

[machaon]

Lets say you were transported back through time to the creation of the universe. Lets say you witnessed the this miracle in slow motion and were filled with awe and wonder. Lets say you saw time and space ripple from the very finger of god. Imagine if you were given a means to prove to eveyone what you saw. How would you use this new found knowledge to save the world? To end suffering? Lets say that because of you the whole world believes in God. That still would not solve how different people interpret gods motivations. That still would not prove that anyone has ever been provided with a means to communicate with god. And even if they did it would not prove god is not a liar or has good intentions. It certainly would not prove that god has any interest in humans whatsoever. My question is this: then what?

 

[ellion]

where else would the invisible reside.

the invisible wouLd reside anywhere but it wouldnt be visible.

yes the supernatural is in my imagination, I accept that, as it is in everypersons imagination.

to say that the supernatural is an facet of the imagination is a leap of faith based on own projected fanatasies.

Supernatural forces can not be shown to exist by the scientific method. Supernatural claims assert phenomena beyond the realm of current scientific understanding, which are often in direct conflict with current scientific theory.
therefore it must be of the imagination.

what you are saying here is science fails to explain supernatural forces therefore they must be in the imagination.

this is a conclusion based on your lack of comprehension.

science failing to explain supernatural phenomenom simply means science has failed to explain. saying they must be in the imagination is your way of explaining what science cant explain.
a more reasonable conclusion would be; science does not yet have the method or equipment to set out a feasible explanation for the supernatural.

the imaginary, and the invisible are of the same ilk.

the imaginary is something created by the imagination. the invisible is something that is not visible in what ilk are they the same?

The supernatural is also a topic in various genres of fiction, fiction is of the imagination.

it seems to me your are letting your imagination run away with you.

it seems to me your intellect has run away from you.
but i see what i see, you see what you see. so it should be.

Lets say you were transported back through time to the creation of the universe. Lets say you witnessed the this miracle in slow motion and were filled with awe and wonder. Lets say you saw time and space ripple from the very finger of god. Imagine if you were given a means to prove to eveyone what you saw. How would you use this new found knowledge to save the world? To end suffering? Lets say that because of you the whole world believes in God. That still would not solve how different people interpret gods motivations. That still would not prove that anyone has ever been provided with a means to communicate with god. And even if they did it would not prove god is not a liar or has good intentions. It certainly would not prove that god has any interest in humans whatsoever. My question is this: then what?

there is a lot of questions raised here, and though i understand where your coming from it would be better if i check this out with you.
you suppose proving to people that god exists is important.
you think that the world needs saving.
you believe that suffering needs to end.
you appreciate that people interpret gods motivations differently.
you yourself would like proof that it is possible to communicate with god.
you believe god has deceived and hurt people.
you wonder if god has any interest in humans at all.
and you dont really know what would happen if any of this was different.
did i get that right?

 

[alteredperception]

I completely understand the irrational blind faith people have in the supernatural and their unwillingness to be rational.

Ellion - you obviosly don't grasp the concept of time. Causality presupposes existence, existence does not presuppose causality. You are a naive person, confused by your own conscious thoughts.

And you don't grasp the entire reason I posted this thread. The Universe was never created out of nothingness. Existence has always existed. Your wrong concept of time is whats confusing you. I recommend you re-read the quote in my first post and tell me what you don't understand about it.

 

[machaon]

you suppose proving to people that god exists is important.
you think that the world needs saving.
you believe that suffering needs to end.
you appreciate that people interpret gods motivations differently.
you yourself would like proof that it is possible to communicate with god.
you believe god has deceived and hurt people.
you wonder if god has any interest in humans at all.
and you dont really know what would happen if any of this was different.
did i get that right?


Actually, the point I was tryng to make was that it really does not matter if god exist or not. What does matter is how people that claim to believe in god are trying to change the world. If one uses their belief in god to try to end suffering here on Earth, then great. There should be no need to prove that god exist, just that one is trying to do good things and help because one beleives that god exist. And if one tries to end suffering out of compassion with no belief in god, fine. There should be no need to prove that god does not exist. I mean say one did prove that god did exist. That would not change anything here on earth. Say you proved that he did not exist. That would not change anything either. The existence or non-existence of god means nor changes anything here on Earth. Only people can change things here on this planet, and it would be nice to think for the better. Not in an everyone-holding-hands-singing-folk-songs-better. Just better.

 

[ellion]

You are a naive person, confused by your own conscious thoughts.

Your wrong concept of time is whats confusing you.

you say the cause of a tree is the parent tree. this is causality, yes? it is also infinite regress, yes?
you are saying that the universe has existed eternally, you are also saying infinite causes (regress) cannot exist. my confusion is caused by your inconsistency.

now, i am also questioning why you are avoiding my questions.
is there something you dont want to see, or something you dont want to admit?

re-reading you first post still doesnt answer the questions it raises.

a question, does anything exist 'outside' or 'anterior' to your perception of existence?

why is it true that there cannot be an infinite number of antecedent causes if the universe has always existed then causes have always existed. why do you say an eternal universe can exist but infinite causes cannot?

this is the third time i have asked you these questions
please dont answer as you have here;

to answer your question, nothing exists outside or anterior to existence.

as i am not asking what exists outside or anterior to existence.


or here;

nothing caused existence

as i am not asking you what caused existence


or here

Causality presupposes existence, existence does not presuppose causality.

as i am not asking what came before existence.

answer now, for yourself, i already understand your difficulty to percieve your own contradictions

 

[alteredperception]

i didn't write everything in the first post. Its a quote from Nathaniel Branden.

Anyways, to answer your questions,

why is it true that there cannot be an infinite number of antecedent causes if the universe has always existed then causes have always existed.

yes its infinite regress within the realm of existence. However, there cannot be an infinite series of antecedent causes for existence as a whole (see my first post).

why do you say an eternal universe can exist but infinite causes cannot?

To demand a cause for all of existence is to demand a contradiction: if the cause exists, it is part of the existence; if it does not exist, it cannot be a cause. (see the quote in my first post)

does anything exist 'outside' or 'anterior' to your perception of existence?

Other people's perceptions of the universe exist outside my perception of the universe

 

[Ganesh]

hi alteredperception,

You claim that the scenario I outlined in my (large) post stems from MY imagination...

This is not the case...it is a conclusion based on the study of various academic works by many people, not just me... research such as Zecharia Sitchen's translations of the Sumerian tablets and cylinders...Lloyd Pye's work regarding Intervention vs. Evolution...and Cole's work in 'Hidden Archeology'...

If anyone has a sci-fi 'imagination' worthy of George Lucas..then it's the Ancient Sumerians..

If you choose not to look at the literature, then you've got no basis to call people 'naive', and then avoid the issue with semantics and wordplay...

"Methinks he doth protest too much"...what are you really scared of ?

Peace to all...

 

[stefan]

what you are saying here is science fails to explain supernatural forces therefore they must be in the imagination.
science failing to explain supernatural phenomenom simply means science has failed to explain. saying they must be in the imagination is your way of explaining what science cant explain.

until such time as anybody, can prove that that the supernatural resides in the realms of the natural, yes.

the imaginary is something created by the imagination. the invisible is something that is not visible in what ilk are they the same?

neither can be seen with the naked eye.


could you answer a few small questions for me.
1, is the invisible, subjective or objective?.
2, is the imagination, subjective or objective?.
3, is the supernatural, subjective or objective?.

to say that the supernatural is an facet of the imagination is a leap of faith

how

 

[Ganesh]

hi stefan,

The subjective becomes objective only when ratified by 'science', if it chooses to look at the subject...

When groups of people see something like Halley's Comet, while it may be subjective observation (as you can't touch or test the phenomena) , because science knows what the phenomena is, it is accepted...

When there are mass sightings of UFO's for example, it is considered 'subjective' or 'mass hallucination' because 'science' has no explanation.

These UFO's, of course, can't be considered 'supernatural' if they're manifesting in our 'solid reality'

As far as testing the supernatural (ghosts, entities, gods etc.) on this level (3rd level density)...well, it's a contradiction in terms, isn't it ?

It's only because of the superconducting nature of these metallic elements in our brain chemistry (iridium & rhodium) that some can access or view entities on other levels of density...

It's no big deal, just undisclosed science...

Peace to all..... and steer clear of the 'Fear Matrix'

 

[ellion]

i didn't write everything in the first post. Its a quote from Nathaniel Branden.

Anyways, to answer your questions,

why is it true that there cannot be an infinite number of antecedent causes if the universe has always existed then causes have always existed.

yes its infinite regress within the realm of existence. However, there cannot be an infinite series of antecedent causes for existence as a whole (see my first post).

why do you say an eternal universe can exist but infinite causes cannot?

To demand a cause for all of existence is to demand a contradiction: if the cause exists, it is part of the existence; if it does not exist, it cannot be a cause. (see the quote in my first post)

does anything exist 'outside' or 'anterior' to your perception of existence?

so we will leave causality out of the equation as it is nothing more than a function of existence.
so then if god exists, there is no need for a creator of god no need for a cause of god, god just exists. there is no requirement for anything to have created or caused that divine spiritual prinicple which is absolute and manifest throughout eternity. if everything that exists has always existed the purpose of your post is what? it ammounts to the equvelant of 'there is no breath without breathing'

Other people's perceptions of the universe exist outside my perception of the universe.

this is an excellent answer and exactly what i am getting at. the way you perceive the universe is not the only way to percieve the universe. so what does not exist or have an explanation in your universe, may have existence and explanation in another perception of the universe.


________________________________

1, is the invisible, subjective or objective?.

to say THE INVISIBLE is a bit vague. the invisible what? air, gas, sound, sensation, infra red, radiation . what do you equate with THE INVISIBLE?

is cognition and emotion a facet of THE INVISIBLE?

2, is the imagination, subjective or objective?.

the imagination is a subjective creative function.

3, is the supernatural, subjective or objective?.

again this woud depend on the aspect of the supernatural you are refering to? so i will say both.

to say that the supernatural is an facet of the imagination is a leap of faith

how

you said that the supernatural is in your imagination and you can accept that. that is a fair point. the things that you precieve as being supernatural you attribute to your imagination or you recognize as being a creation of your imagination, that is fine. to say that this is how it is for everyone is speculation(a leap of faith, if you then believe it is the truth) which is only backed by yours and sciences inability to offer an explanation that you are able to accomadate into your concept of reality. and you confirm this here

Supernatural forces can not be shown to exist by the scientific method. Supernatural claims assert phenomena beyond the realm of current scientific understanding, which are often in direct conflict with current scientific theory.
therefore it must be of the imagination.
the imaginary, and the invisible are of the same ilk.
The supernatural is also a topic in various genres of fiction, fiction is of the imagination.

 

[stefan]

to say THE INVISIBLE is a bit vague. the invisible what? air, gas, sound, sensation, infra red, radiation . what do you equate with THE INVISIBLE?

so as you need clarifcation, the invisible= something that cant be seen, touched, heard, tasted, or smelt.
does that help, that has always been my interpretation of invisible

is cognition and emotion a facet of THE INVISIBLE?

no cogition is something we gain from reality ( example the 5 senses), and emotions are chemical reactions to stimuli9 example the 5 senses).

again this would depend on the aspect of the supernatural you are refering to? so i will say both.

I would be grateful if you could help me with what you mean by different aspects of the supernatural, also whilst you explain your reasons for your believe of objective supernatural(an oxymoron), could you also post some links to verify it, thank you.

 

[ellion]

to say THE INVISIBLE is a bit vague. the invisible what? air, gas, sound, sensation, infra red, radiation . what do you equate with THE INVISIBLE?

so as you need clarifcation, the invisible= something that cant be seen, touched, heard, tasted, or smelt.
does that help, that has always been my interpretation of invisible.

well your interpretation is fucked up try using the actual defintion.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=invisible
3 entries for invisible.
in·vis·i·ble adj.

1. Impossible to see; not visible: Air is invisible.
2. Not accessible to view; hidden: mountain peaks invisible in the fog.
3. Not easily noticed or detected; inconspicuous: “The poor are politically invisible” (Michael Harrington).
4. Not published in financial statements: an invisible asset.

tell me what you make of this before i continue.

 

[alteredperception]

there is only 1 objective reality. Mine is the most realistic. Causality doesn't apply to existence. Therefore on what grounds do you deny that existence has existed eternally?

 

[ellion]

read this quote again,

there is only 1 objective reality. Mine is the most realistic.

do you see how you contradict your self?

 

[alteredperception]

no, mine is the most widely accepted