absence of a sensory organ isn't absence of everything else
-
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!
Silence
- Thread starter Fool
- Start date
absence of a sensory organ isn't absence of everything else
james bond
Well-Known Member
Golden.
It is the absence of sound, so formed.
It is the absence of sound, so formed.
james bond
Well-Known Member
You forgot God is the absence of evil.
Silence is that which isn't present and can't be sensed.
Ponder This
Well-Known Member
Silence is the presence of a perceiver without the presence of things perceived.
Things that are perceived have a definite form. Silence is without form. In other words, silence is given form by the presence of things around it that have form.
For example, each musical note has a perceivable form. The parts of music that are silent gain their form from the form of the other sounds around them. The silent parts do not have a form that they themselves impart.
The presence of a perceiver with the inability to perceive sounds is deafness. It is like silence in that there is still the presence of a perceiver and a lack of things perceived.
We can distinguish between an "awareness of silence" and a "lack of awareness of silence".
The profound silence experience that we are usually looking for is the "awareness of silence" experience and not the "lack of awareness of silence" experience.
If the Angels are Dancing and no one is around to see them are they really Dancing?
Things that are perceived have a definite form. Silence is without form. In other words, silence is given form by the presence of things around it that have form.
For example, each musical note has a perceivable form. The parts of music that are silent gain their form from the form of the other sounds around them. The silent parts do not have a form that they themselves impart.
The presence of a perceiver with the inability to perceive sounds is deafness. It is like silence in that there is still the presence of a perceiver and a lack of things perceived.
We can distinguish between an "awareness of silence" and a "lack of awareness of silence".
The profound silence experience that we are usually looking for is the "awareness of silence" experience and not the "lack of awareness of silence" experience.
If the Angels are Dancing and no one is around to see them are they really Dancing?
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
The sensory organ doesn't have to be absent for the stimulus to be absent. I can't see, because there's no light. I can't hear, because there're no sound-waves.
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
LOL, I only addressed what physics can demonstrate.
Not to derail the discussion, but if god is the absence of evil, and god is everywhere, then how can evil exist anywhere?
so basically silence is a hallucination for you? because its the absence of all movement?
even though string theory states that everything, literally everything vibrates at some level?
in the same way that justice is present at all times; until someone perverts it. most people want justice but do they want it for others as self? not if they are power hungry, oppressive, or despots.
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
LOL, putting words in my mouth is supposed to strengthen your position?
Yes, a banana vibrates. But if there is no banana in the room....?
Sound-waves are energy waves, but if there are none in the room....?
Silence is hardly the absence of all movement (putting words in my mouth), it's the absence of perceivable sound-waves. Remember, sound isn't a real thing, just like color; it's a subjective interpretation of perceived energy. There may, or may not, be sound waves within ear shot. Sound doesn't exist until a receptor (ear) detects them and they are converted to neural signals and transmitted to the CNS where they are interpreted. This is a one day lesson in basic physics.
Sound-waves can be completely absent; the may exist but not within the frequency range of perceptible sound for the species/individual; they may exist with or without sufficient amplitude to be detectible; the ear may be perfect but neural transmitters and/or CNS may have issues. Any of these can be called silence.
A person that touches an instrument and feels the vibrations IS NOT hearing sound-waves. They are using tactile sense (not hearing) to detect physical vibrations, that may be subjectively interpreted in much the same way sound is. Remember, sound exists in the mind only.
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
i didn't put words in your mouth, or put "your" words on this page.
I asked a question. a question isn't usually attributed as a quote; unless duly noted by the writer.
note the punctuation mark at the end of the sentence, it was a
"?"
PureX
Veteran Member
This isn't that complicated. Silence is the perceived lack of sound. It has nothing to do with whether or not sound waves are present. It's about the cognitive perception that none are being heard. Silence is so related to cognitive perception that the word is often used to describe a "quiet mind". Inferring not the lack of audible sound waves, but the lack of excessive cognitive activity.
Last edited:
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
And I didn't say you put words in my mouth. I asked a question. Note the punctuation mark at the end of the sentence, it was a "?."
FunctionalAtheist
Hammer of Reason
This sounds good, but...if you're not stimulated, you're not stimulated.
"Perceived lack of sound" explicates you are stimulated by the lack of a stimulus. "Lack of perceived sound" explicates that you are not stimulated, stimulus present or not.
sammyadele82
i have no idea what im doing
can you be a little more specific of both the kind of silence and what you call the "formed" and "unformed" please?
yes, i know you asked a question and i responded with an answer that specifically stated the intent of my sentence
in my question, i referred to an idea.
in "your" line of questioning, you referred to an action you were questioning as being imposed upon you by another. most people don't answer a question with a question; especially one implying something the original question didn't ask and didn't blatantly state as being quoted by the responder. you took an idea and made it personal
Functional Atheist said, "LOL, putting words in my mouth is supposed to strengthen your position?"
sammyadele82
i have no idea what im doing
i know the litteral meaning i was asking your personal meaning. i assumed you knew that an action/thing couldnt be a physical, shaped thing. it is what it is, different levels of nothing to each individual.