Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
My views are based on observation and evidence, unlike your views which are based on non-credible sources.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Could Nothingness Be Another Dimension In And Of Itself?
- Thread starter Runewolf1973
- Start date
My views are based on observation and evidence, unlike your views which are based on non-credible sources.
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
godnotgod
Thou art That
The Universe (ie; 'Reality') is a non-credible source?
How often have scientific ideas presented as fact been overturned, especially today with the advent of Quantum Physics?
godnotgod
Thou art That
It is not based on information gathered from perceptual reality.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Examples of dogmatic thinking. I'll speak real slowly so you cannot miss it.
1 -
This is a dogmatic belief about the so-called "mystical view" (which implies all mystics would support this statement). The assertion also suggests that this "mystical view" is always non-dual and is of Reality (as if it is a fact beyond dispute). There is nothing factual about these assertions and I would assert that reality is far more fickle than some errant misfits... errr, sorrry, "mystics" might suggest.
2 -
3 -
4 -
5 -
1 -
This is a dogmatic belief about the so-called "mystical view" (which implies all mystics would support this statement). The assertion also suggests that this "mystical view" is always non-dual and is of Reality (as if it is a fact beyond dispute). There is nothing factual about these assertions and I would assert that reality is far more fickle than some errant misfits... errr, sorrry, "mystics" might suggest.
2 -
Not necessarily. See the two definitions that I gave above. Neither references dogma as being a prerequisite and the American usage "(of a person or a group) strongly expressing your beliefs as if they were facts" specifically applies as that is clearly what you are doing.
3 -
While there may not be dogmatic thinking IN reality there certainly can be dogmatic thinking ABOUT "reality".
4 -
Yet another assumption about both reality and the so-called "mystical view". Personally, I find this a very dangerous idea as it could lead one to believe that their vision of reality is perfect and sadly, though our vision of reality can be enhanced, we should never assume that our apprehension is perfect. It is my suggestion that such an idea actually closes off the possibility for further growth until that idea about the veracity of experience is re-examined.
5 -
This too is an example of dogmatic thinking as it ascribes attributes of flawlessness to the so-called "mystical view" when there is simply no evidence that the statement is true.the mystical view cannot possibly be a dogmatic view.
Last edited:
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
It would be nice to get back to the OP question. This thread isn't supposed to be about Chopra's nonsense, I'm sick of hearing about it.
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
That reminds me... You had asked if my original question had been sufficiently answered or not. I think LegionOnomamoi gave a pretty good answer to that.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
I thought he probably did though it was a bit technical for me.
How about a nice cup of tea then?
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I felt that @LegionOnomaMoi covered it pretty well. The thread since has just been a sideshow.
godnotgod
Thou art That
Yours is based on a dual view of the Universe, which is obviously false.
Contrary to what you are saying, the mystical view is verifiable by anyone who will just go see for themselves. In fact, it has been independently verified for thousands of years by mystics all over the world, and that view has not changed, while science changes its view all the time.
godnotgod
Thou art That
The issue between Chopra and Dawkins is whether the universe is conscious or not.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
A sideshow tent, anyway, one selling snake-oil.
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
godnotgod
Thou art That
So you decided to leave Buddishism and join the circus as a carnie-barker? Purrr-fect!
godnotgod
Thou art That
You and your magnifying glass can't see the obvious. It's right in under your nose but you continue to demand evidence. Are you telling me you don't know that your own theory is a duality? Actually, you admitted as much a few posts back, so story end.
The universe cannot be divided. IT'S THE UNI-VERSE! GET IT?
Last edited:
godnotgod
Thou art That
Did you miss the part about the mystical experience being beyond Logic, Reason, and Analysis, while leaving no trace? And yet, you persist in your silly demand. So how long have you been a member of the Evidence Nazis?
"Your papers, please!"
Last edited:
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
What you percieve as dualities with regards to my theories or my use of terminology are not true dualities. They are seeming dualities. The universe is one undivided whole. The interactions are not separate, nor is the Animating Factor separate. The universe as a singular, all-encompassing unit IS the Animating Factor.
Last edited:
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
The damner and that damned are not really two separate things....that's just the dualistic mind's maya... haha..just teasing....but still true...