Homo Idioticus

a reply to: Astrocyte

In other words, People or Humanity does some f*cked up things both as individuals and as a group which creates an even greater propensity for us to continue to act in those same destructive ways.

Did I understand you correctly???

a reply to: ClovenSky

What is a soul then if it's outside those things???

Where would it influence us being outside those things, assuming that it exists at all??

a reply to: mOjOm

I currently believe in the soul. Nature is what we are born with, our body, the attributes we picked out through which we experience this life. Nurture is our surroundings, sensory inputs and life that we experience. The soul is who we are.

The soul is our intuition. All 3 together determine our course in life.

Sorry, my response was part troll. I wanted to see what the OP is trying to imply. My intelligence and grammatical are poor enough that I could barely understand what their main point was.

Sometimes a fart meme can be just as effective.

a reply to: Astrocyte

Than, or then? What's the difference? This is the part I would like to discuss.

It almost appears, and correct me if I am wrong, that the OP is getting frustrated with people suggesting that there are forces outside of our modern scientific process of measurement. That if something can not be measured and recreated from a theoretical standpoint, it shouldn't matter or that it doesn't even exist. They are simply delusions that we are creating to help us cope with this reality. I got the impression that their main concern or argument is with the spiritual. It can not be measured by the tools that we currently possess.

So they are possibly calling those of us that believe in something outside of the physical as being delusional.

a reply to: ClovenSky

Why is "who we are" and our "intuition" regarded as something other than our nature or nurture?? It seems to me that it is just a product of them both that you're labeling as something different.

I mean, you are who you are because of both nature and nurture. That is you. If you were someone else you wouldn't be you living their life. You would just be them. Does that make sense???

Also, yes, he's very difficult to understand. I'm having a hard time following some of what he says as well. I think I'm getting the gist of it but not sure where he's going with it just yet either. Or maybe I do, I'm still trying to verify that part myself.

a reply to: DayAfterTomorrow

I'll take a shot at that. Than denotes some kind of physical difference where as then is some form of temporal difference.

For example, an apple is different than an orange but I first ate and apple then I ate the orange.

Not sure if that's correct, but that's my guess. Hopefully someone who knows can tell me if I'm right.

a reply to: mOjOm

Yes. Correct.

a reply to: Astrocyte

hav sum empathy lol delusions is all that man can make ):

a reply to: daniel2sxc

he is having fun whilst doing so

a reply to: DayAfterTomorrow

Is that really the correct answer??? No way....

It made sense to me but I didn't know if that was really correct. Kinda just thought it was a really good BS answer though.

a reply to: daniel2sxc

probb better to think how man concluded his delusion as there is half truth everywhere in the world object interactions and such and man makes truth see if he see something interesting u dont c

a reply to: mOjOm

This is just me rambling of course, it will probably take me another 40 years to solidify my subjective mental creation of what this reality is. I think we possess a soul. The soul is everlasting. It existed before we entered into this reality and it will be the only thing that is left after our mortal shell has expired. It is our intuition that nudges us with the feeling of being on the right path, whatever that may be. It is the core of who we are.

Nature is our physical bodies, our hormones, our brains and possibly our spiritual abilities. Nurture is everything outside of our physical bodies that we have come into contact with.

a reply to: ClovenSky

At the same time if you're not able to measure or examine something and if it's outside the realm of any quantification or study and cannot be repeated and has no patterns by which it repeats, etc. Then how exactly can you claim it to be real???

I mean some form of measurement or product of existence in this reality is what defines something as being real and existing after all. That is what separates what is and what is not.

Doesn't mean something doesn't exist because we haven't found it yet. We discover things all the time that have been around without us noticing it. But once we do we then measure or record something about it that determines it to be a real thing that exists from then on.

But something that is forever outside any definite identifying characteristic means we have no way of saying it actually exists.

a reply to: ClovenSky

Once again though both Nature and Nurture are things that are measurable to some degree and we can study them and their effects.

The soul is seemingly outside of such measurements and sounds much more like a mental fiction of some kind. A fantasy with no basis in reality. If you were to take away the qualities of what you attribute to both Nature and Nurture what else would you have???

Instincts I think would very much go under the label of Nature. Or possibly part of both. How do you really know there is even a 3rd group at all??? Especially since you can't measure or identify it in any way??

a reply to: Astrocyte

...it takes the spirituality of the mind which arises from matter to see it's ultimate union with it, and so with the others it arises from.

Nice piece.

But given that you acknowledge the oneness of us all, why did you choose to write in specialized language, thus alienating so many of those you recognize as 'of' you?

I ask because I've worked my ass off learning how to write about complex things in simple language, and made 'accessibility' the goal.

Is that wrong, do you think?

a reply to: mOjOm

Nature is physical Nuture is mental, the soul/consiousness is the son of those 2 having sex lol
things can only react with another, 2 makes 1 ,u can connect any point n talk # if ur pro in the mind and it'll make Sense thats y there is Law and Court lol

a reply to: daniel2sxc

"#"i cant swear!!!

a reply to: daniel2sxc

That's fine. In fact 2 making 1 makes sense to me. If you want to call soul the product of nature and nurture combined that seems fine.

It's when soul is referred to as a 3rd part that it gets confusing. 2 to 1 you still have the measurable qualities upon which you can base it's existence upon. Having a 3rd without any qualities to measure but still insisting upon it's existence is where it loses any reliability of actually existing.