Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[Ben Dhyan]

You made several claims (that there is a forest, that there are separate trees, etc). So why would we NOT want evidence that those claims are correct?

If you understood the meaning of the analogy of the forest and the trees, you would not mistake the finger pointing at the moon for the moon.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You're triggered again, try some yoga or some other efficacious religious practice and realize the peace that passeth understanding.

Stop using word like deluded. You are clearly trigged by human diversity. Two can play that game.

 

[Polymath257]

Belief is a conceptualization of something, the conceptualization is not actually that represented by the conceptualization. Get with realization, not conceptualization.

Yes, yes. A finger pointing at the moon is not the moon. A picture of a pipe is not a pipe.

Realization is not a reliable method to find truth.

 

[Polymath257]

If you understood the meaning of the analogy of the forest and the trees, you would not mistake the finger pointing at the moon for the moon.

Why do you think I made that mistake? Give an example where I do that.

 

[Polymath257]

No you have never had one, nor has any mortal self. The mortal 'I' can not be present in a spiritual experience, oneness must prevail in the state of pure awareness.

So you have not had one either.....a good admission.

 

[ratiocinator]

As regards the concept within Physics of “space time”, I would note that Physics is merely the branch of mathematics that deals with real objects and their interactions. As with all maths, the postulates of Physics are held to be valid by physicists so long as they are mathematically valid and theoretically congruent.

Actually physics uses mathematics as a tool to construct models (hypotheses and theories) that can then make predictions that can be tested against reality via observation and/or experiments. Mathematical validity is necessary but not sufficient to accept the model. The important point is that its predictions match reality. That is evidence for the theory.

I think it should be obvious to anybody who has thought about it deeply, but here, this should get you started:

Just philosophical musings. No evidence. Reality matches the space-time model in all ways that we have tested it.

 

[Polymath257]

Sure,

Just what one would expect an atheist to say, but hey, freedom of speech.

And what did I say that is false?

 

[Polymath257]

“Time” is simply the mental construct by which the human mind orders and makes sense of the continual succession of events in the universe.

No, it actually is not. It is a coordinate of the geometry of a four dimensional spacetime.

For example, we can actually measure the curvature of time in a gravitational field.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

As with all maths, the postulates of Physics are held to be valid by physicists so long as they are mathematically valid and theoretically congruent.

...and reflective of actual observable reality.

It's perfectly possible to build mathematical models of a universe with the math being perfectly valid and theoretically congruent, while actually describing a non-existing universe (or a universe that isn't our universe).

“Time” is simply the mental construct by which the human mind orders and makes sense of the continual succession of events in the universe.

It is an objective truth that there are successions of events in the universe.
This means that the flow of time within said universe is an objective truth.
If it wasn't, there would be no succession of events, 1 happening after the other.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Stop using word like deluded. You are clearly trigged by human diversity. Two can play that game.

Sorry, I had to go back and find where I said it, and it was definitely an inappropriate, I meant unenlightened. My apologies.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You're triggered again, try some yoga or some other efficacious religious practice and realize the peace that passeth understanding.

And once again, running from the actual point and borderlining ad hominems with that "triggered" bs.

Try actually addressing the very valid points raised instead.
3 people have raised the same point to you today in this thread.
You are ignoring all 3 and doing your very best to keep it up.

Even resorting to attempts at personal insult to keep it up.

It's quite pathetic to witness.

Man up, man. Grow some cohones.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, yes. A finger pointing at the moon is not the moon. A picture of a pipe is not a pipe.

Realization is not a reliable method to find truth.

Realization is not a method, it is truth. But to be sure, a 'realization' episode is only the beginning.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Why do you think I made that mistake? Give an example where I do that.

Almost everything to say, you mistake the maya of this world for reality.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So you have not had one either.....a good admission.

I've always made that clear, but the goal is to transcend self identification with the 'I' and attain non-duality eternally.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

And once again, running from the actual point and borderlining ad hominems with that "triggered" bs.

Try actually addressing the very valid points raised instead.
3 people have raised the same point to you today in this thread.
You are ignoring all 3 and doing your very best to keep it up.

Even resorting to attempts at personal insult to keep it up.

It's quite pathetic to witness.

Man up, man. Grow some cohones.

So, it seems your trigger is trigger. Now that I am aware, I will do my best to resist triggering you by saying you are triggered.
Btw, I liked Roy Roger's films, just loved his white horse. oops

 

[ratiocinator]

So, it seems your trigger is trigger. Now that I am aware, I will do my best to resist triggering you by saying you are triggered.
Btw, I liked Roy Roger's films, just loved his white horse. oops

And you still seem terrified of actually facing up to the points being made.

Yet again: many people claim 'spiritual realisation', 'revelation' and so on, but they contradict each other, so, even if we're generous and concede that it might offer some access to truth, it is clearly very unreliable.

Cue more running away...

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So, it seems your trigger is trigger. Now that I am aware, I will do my best to resist triggering you by saying you are triggered.
Btw, I liked Roy Roger's films, just loved his white horse. oops

And you continue playing the silly game of intellectual dishonesty and borderline ad hominem "argumentation" instead of actually addressing the points raised head-on.
This does not reflect good on you or your case.

Oh well.

Here, have an appropriate trophy:

 

[Polymath257]

Realization is not a method, it is truth. But to be sure, a 'realization' episode is only the beginning.

Realizations can be wrong.

Almost everything to say, you mistake the maya of this world for reality.

No, I do not 'mistake' it. I believe it.

I've always made that clear, but the goal is to transcend self identification with the 'I' and attain non-duality eternally.

So you also, have not had the experiences you talk about. So you are also not an authority.

 

[Polymath257]

So, it seems your trigger is trigger. Now that I am aware, I will do my best to resist triggering you by saying you are triggered.
Btw, I liked Roy Roger's films, just loved his white horse. oops

Being triggered is not the same as disagreeing.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

And you still seem terrified of actually facing up to the points being made.

Yet again: many people claim 'spiritual realisation', 'revelation' and so on, but they contradict each other, so, even if we're generous and concede that it might offer some access to truth, it is clearly very unreliable.

Cue more running away...

But you by self admission are not enlightened, so anything and everything you say about the subject is second hand claims, Now do it yourself or forever hold your peace.