The Appeal of Darkness

[Static]

heh! its the most interesting convo ive ever had here. usually the threads are "how big was mike's morning shit?" followed by hundreds of posts from annoying trolls who roamed over from SOT.

Hey, I'm not saying it's a bad thing (even though I'm too lazy to actually read it right now). It's just, this board isn't really renowned for its intellectual conversations, so it was a slight surprise.

 

[Nico]

I have even heard theories that suggest (although I know nothing about their credibility) that the brain is the conduit of consciousness/of the spirit, not the source itself.

I've long had a personal beleif that the conscious mind is something like the receptor/receiver of the spirit/soul, and the bridge between the physical and the spiritual. Of course, I dont doubt this depends very much upon your definition of 'mind'...

 

[marfrozzi]

first of all, i find it interesting that you think my use of evolution as limited when you reference one of the most laughable theories of all time (the strong anthropic principle) in another post. evolution is fact and is backed by an endless amount of physical evidence while the strong anthropic principle is basically just the idea that humans are the center of the universe. ive never run across any actual evidence that lends credence to the SAP.

disclaimer: i see your point about evolutionary psychology. i dont think psychology holds much water. its more an art than it is a science.

secondly, i apologize for only using christianity. i felt it was the only religion that i could effectively comment on.

thirdly, i dont think my saying that god probably doesnt exist is an opinion. i think that is based on sound scientific principles (which you duly noted). and i know alot of people dont think "this way". what is the significance of saying that? i didnt understand what you were getting at. my opinion is that alot of people are uneducated couch potatoes who would rather watch nascar than pick up a book on cosmology. i also think alot of people would much rather be spoon-fed unproveable ideas about supernatural phenomenon than face a reality that there is no common denominator of a reason for our existence. i experience these people daily but i guess its still just an opinion.....

opeth rules

I don't feel like arguing about this anymore--I know where the foundations for your argument lie because I've already heard this many times elsewhere. It would take far too detailed an explanation of certain metaphysical concepts and theories to fully articulate challenges to your view. So let's just agree that Opeth rules and leave it at that.

 

[dorian gray]

^Agreed

We should realy thank IAmEternal for pulling this topic out of the obscurity of another thread. Cant remember who brought up the topic though... I think it was dorian gray.

thanks shroud....and yes, it was me peering thro...i mean it was me who created the original thread.

 

[dorian gray]

I don't feel like arguing about this anymore--I know where the foundations for your argument lie because I've already heard this many times elsewhere. It would take far too detailed an explanation of certain metaphysical concepts and theories to fully articulate challenges to your view. So let's just agree that Opeth rules and leave it at that.

hah! i heard that. i was starting to run out of things to say anyway. i enjoyed discussing it with you and rose immortal though. good stuff from both of you.
one last word though: weak, intermediate, and strong anthropic principles were officially debunked in 1997 by Dr. Michael Shermer along with various other "superstitions, pseudosciences, and confusions" (as he puts it). several other studies in the mid 90s to now, like carl sagans the demon haunted world have debunked virtually all metaphysical theories. im not trying to be a dick here and say youre wrong, im just saying that these theories are officially a waste of time (if youre into the whole critical analysis thing). i was once into metaphysics and i wanted to see if what i believed in was valid, so i read up on them and found out theyre not.
regarding super sting theory: rose immortal, i think you mentioned this. brian greene wrote the elegant universe and i recommend it if you havent read it, but string theory (i think you mentioned this) is actually a pseudo-science and is just a mathematical exercise. its not real and i dont know of any scientist who takes it literally.

good talking to you...
cheers, guys

opeth still rules

 

[marfrozzi]

hah! i heard that. i was starting to run out of things to say anyway. i enjoyed discussing it with you and rose immortal though. good stuff from both of you.
one last word though: weak, intermediate, and strong anthropic principles were officially debunked in 1997 by Dr. Michael Shermer along with various other "superstitions, pseudosciences, and confusions" (as he puts it). several other studies in the mid 90s to now, like carl sagans the demon haunted world have debunked virtually all metaphysical theories. im not trying to be a dick here and say youre wrong, im just saying that these theories are officially a waste of time (if youre into the whole critical analysis thing). i was once into metaphysics and i wanted to see if what i believed in was valid, so i read up on them and found out theyre not.

Well, I still don't think one man's word is omnipotent--science is in constant flux after all, and when you start talking about theories that are this abstract/theoretical you can't do much more than support your case with data which may or may not be indicative of the validity of the theory. The thing is about metaphysics, it's just as hard to prove that intangible reality exists as it is to prove that it doesn't--I think it's largely a matter of faith, and there is almost no way science renders it impossible.

Seriously though, I'm done...I write about this stuff enough for school...

 

[dorian gray]

i totally agree with you. but it IS possible to analyze someones theory and debunk it. if youre saying that doesnt necessarily negate the possibility of the given subject then i agree.
good luck with school....

 

[Rose Immortal]

regarding super sting theory: rose immortal, i think you mentioned this. brian greene wrote the elegant universe and i recommend it if you havent read it, but string theory (i think you mentioned this) is actually a pseudo-science and is just a mathematical exercise. its not real and i dont know of any scientist who takes it literally.

I have not yet read the book, but I have at least seen the PBS series (available for streaming on their site). I have considered taking a look at the book, though. And yes, at this point there is no way to test string theory--I am aware of that, and it's understandable that opinion in the scientific community would be divided over it. I haven't closed my mind to the idea, especially since I lack the grounding in physics to do so...so, it will certainly be interesting to see if any further developments come along to indicate one way or the other about the theory.

As for the concept of faith, I will make one final closing remark. Ultimately, none of us will have the final answers in our lifetimes. Therefore, at some point, we all have to find some way of dealing with that gap between the known and unknown. I know I did not do the best job with defending my viewpoints--and, although I've tried to pursue it as far as I can in the forum (and have continued even further in my own private journals and readings), at some point, one simply must say (regardless of what position one takes, religious, non-religious or whatever, this STILL holds true), "I feel...I believe."