Apologies if I've offended you, but what I'm doing in these threads is questioning ideas and reasoning. I understand you feel invested in whatever narrative you're espousing, but I'm assuming you'd want problems pointed out, just as I would.
I admit I do get frustrated at times, when reasonable points are repeatedly ignored.
You dont like evolution?
or is discounting entropy as the reason, what made you see red?
My speculation in this particular post involved an impression of where you were coming from, and why it confuses so many of us. You seem to be echoing the religion/philosophy I most closely identify with: Advaita Vedanta, which posits a hierarchy of levels of reality ending in a pantheistic, metaphysical Unity.
What? Did my claim that "mankind is defining itself' cause the trigger? Is that the philosophical approach that caused you to try and put me into a box. I figured that in today's world many have figured that out by now.
'Life abuses entropy', is perhaps the clincher, that broke your back. I wrote at the start, that I have a bunch of principles that are different than you will find written by ANYONE. I just wrote in the religious section, asking, if god would prefer people that CHOSE to keep the commandments (maintain personal responsibility) to lead and teach mankind versus the idea of everyone following a tribe of 'chosen ones' claimed to be chosen by god? Not exact words by that is the gist. My point is, I am just that non complacent.
I had the impression you might be expressing a certain, well-known mystical viewpoint, which might be coherant at it's proper level, but when mixed into a discussion based in the concrete, logical reality of diverse "things" we experience in everyday life, seems to make no sense.
Sure, very few are willing to take on being honest before belief or accepted paradigm.
I am one of those! too honest and I am absolutely capable to think for myself.
Attack what, you, your ideas, or your reasoning?
I know, my reasoning is, I do not have to prove anything to anyone. I owe you nothing.
How so? Are we not all speaking from a shared perception of reality; a shared world, in a common language? I thought I was being clear on that point.
Yes, you were clear. You will attack me, if I do not comply as if I was submitting a paper for peer review.
Not a word-salad. I'd be happy to rephrase and explain if you're not following.
No need.
Bthoth is not my name, it is my label on this channel. DO NOT impose hostility or try to discredit my label, because I am unwilling to give you what you want. If you do not like what I say, then move on.
NO.
That's not your word, it's in the public domain, so to speak, as a a legitimate school of philosophy or world-view.
Correct, I do not claim to own a religious label. But I do own up to comprehending that LIFE: abuses entropy. And I do not have to prove it to you. The perfect cross of nature is em (electromagnetic) light. The magnetic and electric fields in perpendicular planes. I can live forever, or perfectly put my life is already half way there. I can raise the fathers to the flesh. I may not do it the way religious people expect but in fact they are alive here and now.
I have a whole bunch of statements, that will bug people but with rational basic common sense, anyone can comprehend them and be just as capable and never once have to lie to the self or others to be just as capable.
Dream-state rubbish? How is it rubbish?
It's not a topic or frame of thought that I even comprehend so trying to label or identify me with such claims, is rubbish.
Someone dreaming experiences a reality different from but just as vivid as our waking state perception. Strange things, from our viewpoint, may be experienced, but the dream is not questioned by the dreamer till he advances to waking-state, where all the absurdities become obvious, and the experience is then interpreted as unreal.
That is about exactly how I feel about the few that expect to be considered an authority of and over knowledge.
Again, if this seems gibberish to you I can go over it again, and if critical commentary and argumentation seem like an attack, maybe you should avoid the debate threads. That's what they're for.
I can debate with about anyone on any topic that I am versed in, but being attacked and then not having the ability to punch back, is just wrong.
???? -- to use "pantheism?" To posit a possible clarification of your confusing posts?
Explain.
The use of the term and then other interpretations of the term, that I have no idea about, in an attempt to put me into a woo class, is not civil.
Take any line that i write and question me, i have no problem. But if I am unwilling to write theorem or make up responses to appease you, then DO NOT use insulting terms to try and force me.
