Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[Ben Dhyan]

There is a vast gap between understanding an idea and believing that idea. I *understand* the TLT and SSU. I find that they have been contradicted by the evidence.

I *understand* about the concepts of universal self and how we are all part of a greater consciousness. I just find those ideas to be wrong. I have even believed them in the past (at least, I told myself that I did).

As you have been told many times, it is not about belief, it is about realization.

 

[ratiocinator]

No, you are judging based on your own limited reality.

Another bare assertion.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, evidence comes before belief. A realization is only valuable if it can be tested and verified. Otherwise, it is just like any other unsupported idea.

The material is so caught up in matter, they can not see the forest for the trees.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

If you make a claim and provide no supporting evidence or reasoning, that is a bare assertion.

What is reality to me is a claim about reality to you. That is the dualistic nature of your present state of mind

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I have explored and found a useless wasteland of self-delusion. All fun and 'gee whiz', but little substance.

Objective evidence is precisely what should be required for any belief. To do otherwise is to fall off the path of wisdom.

You are not that bright after all if you have not gotten over your belief that what has been said to you is based on belief.

 

[Polymath257]

The material is so caught up in matter, they can not see the forest for the trees.

So point out the other trees.

 

[Polymath257]

You are not that bright after all if you have not gotten over your belief that what has been said to you is based on belief.

Hmmm... it seems to me that you don't realize your beliefs are, in fact, beliefs.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I am evaluating based on the evidence I have collected. As are you.

And, again, all you need to do to change minds is actually provide evidence as opposed to unsupported assertions.

There is no goal to change minds, we are just exchanging views on reality.

 

[We Never Know]

Everybody does belief. The point is that some beliefs are based on what is rational and supported by evidence and some not.



You keep on asserting that people are being limited by not 'seeing' or 'realising' what you do, but you've provided exactly zero reasons for anybody to take your claims seriously.

"Everybody does belief. The point is that some beliefs are based on what is rational and supported by evidence and some not."

If the evidence is there, there is no belief.

I don't have belief in evolution, I accept the evidence.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Objective evidence is for those who are interested in the truth and want to avoid self-delusion. You may think you've experienced some sort of 'spiritual' reality, but you can't possibly know that you aren't fooling yourself without something objective to confirm it.

The world is full of people who claim to know spiritual truths. At least most of them are wrong because they contradict each other.

No one is claiming anything, it is just an honest exchange,

 

[ratiocinator]

As you have been told many times, it is not about belief, it is about realization.

And as you have been told several times, a 'realisation' without evidence is nothing but a baseless belief.

What is reality to me is a claim about reality to you.

Nobody knows reality, we can only rely on evidence and reasoning to draw (tentative) conclusions about it. If you just make a statement about what you think about reality, without any supporting evidence, is merely a claim. That's what 'claim' means.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Another bare assertion.

You may consider it how you want.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So point out the other trees.

SZ, ratiocinator, and fellow atheists.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Hmmm... it seems to me that you don't realize your beliefs are, in fact, beliefs.

As a materialist, that opinion is to be expected.

 

[ratiocinator]

If the evidence is there, there is no belief.

No, it is still a belief. For example, in philosophy the standard definition of knowledge is 'justified, true belief'.

I don't have belief in evolution, I accept the evidence.

That just means your belief in its truth has a sound basis.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

And as you have been told several times, a 'realisation' without evidence is nothing but a baseless belief.



Nobody knows reality, we can only rely on evidence and reasoning to draw (tentative) conclusions about it. If you just make a statement about what you think about reality, without any supporting evidence, is merely a claim. That's what 'claim' means.

You speak from your own limited atheistic belief.

 

[PureX]

Everyone's conclusions about the truth of reality are based on reason and evidence. The problem is that everyone determines the reasonableness of the limited evidence they have according to their own subjective experiences, needs, desires, and by their own chosen criteria. And of course most of us think the other guy's methods are wrong, and so then is their concludion.

And then we all argue about who is right, endlessly, learning nothing.

If we would all just realize that we are somewhat right and somewhat wrong, and accept the other points of view as amendments, we might actually broaden our understanding.

 

[ratiocinator]

You speak from your own limited atheistic belief.

Yet another bare assertion .

ETA: Anybody can go on repeating this sort of assertion endlessly about literally anything at all. It adds exactly nothing. You might as well just say "I'm right and you're wrong, so there!"

 

[We Never Know]

No, it is still a belief. For example, in philosophy the standard definition of knowledge is 'justified, true belief'.



That just means your belief in its truth has a sound basis.

By that definition atheist have belief about god.

 

[exchemist]

Word salad!

Really? The meaning seems perfectly clear to me.