It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are Your Theories Backed by Science or Faith?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Causality creates conciousness, this is what i am saying. Causality is GOD. You are formed through GOD. It is the structure of the univesre that is evident EVERYWHERE! turn over a rock and there is GOD. Can you have "faith" in GOD to teach you what it is you need to know?

If you saw through enough eyes... you would see the pattern and the structure.




posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   
I would say that everyone to some degree, even those who favor scientific theories, bases their assumptions about the world on faith.

You have to have faith, for instance, that a Hawking, or Bohm, or Einstein, knows what they are doing. Very few of us actually have the ability to find out for ourselves if what science says is true, and in fact, history is littered with scientific facts that have now been discarded as untrue.

I would say if one was looking for a true distinction, one would have to compare whether people lived on faith or whether they just kind of winged it, knowing that they dont really know, and more importantly, cant really know what the truth is.

Both science and religion make claims that we CAN know, one uses scripture and faith in that, the other uses measurements and formulas and faith in that.

I would say that the truth is, we dont know for certain. And maybe we cant.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Thread about faith

we might be on the same page when it come to this point. It is the definition of faith that has developed a double meaning.... created by our own previous ignorance.

[edit on 6-1-2009 by Wertdagf]



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Causality creates conciousness, this is what i am saying. Causality is GOD. You are formed through GOD. It is the structure of the univesre that is evident EVERYWHERE! turn over a rock and there is GOD. Can you have "faith" in GOD to teach you what it is you need to know?

If you saw through enough eyes... you would see the pattern and the structure.


Simply not true. Causality is the basis of creation. Consciousness is of the spirit of God, and is not part of this creation.

My body, my experience is truly based on Causality. But my consciousness is not.

Causality(Science) has it's place, there is no doubt about that. But it needs to be put in it's proper place, not in place of all as those who put causality and science above all else. Those who do so forget it is the scientist(consciousness) that is the only thing which is able to perceive things.

Consciousness gives choice. If people only operate on causality, then they will be easily controlled. And this you can even see in the world, look at how people react to world events. But they don't have too, and that is the reason manipulation is the only way it is possible to keep peoples choices narrowed down, so that they can be controlled - like the 2 party political system for example.

There wouldn't need to be functions of control if such were true. Because they would all be operating only on the causes and effects, which would be the kind of control nobody can go against.

As Neo says in the Matrix movie - the problem is choice. Those who operate on causality end up "losing" because they can't see or understand a choice which doesn't fit the causality.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Breath neo... lol this is about the time where badmedia pukes..... and we say "usualy they dont make it after this long in the matrix".

Isnt it funny that even though the machines didnt know this.... uhh we kinda did? i LOL at that fact alone....

We knew through our experaince that he would choose Trinity over helping the machines.... how is that outside of casulity... you are missunderstanding.

then agian maybe your path in causality... like the machines(AI)....left you without the current ability to understand this(neo saving trininty instead of banging random chicks for the machines.)


i heard that one swish..... nothing but net.


[edit on 6-1-2009 by Wertdagf]



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by The All Seeing I
As we can see, there is more then one way to look at something. In a futile attempt to divide people into two camps, i think it's fair to claim that where the roots of a theory are planted will determine the validity/accuracy of an inquiry/speculation.


Why on earth would you want to divide us into two camps? Don't the media do a good enough job of that already? I wouldn't agree that it's futile – I think the attempt to divide and polarize is all too often all too successful.


I challenge every single ATSer of every forum to step back and take a long hard honest look at themselves, as to where they stand in relation to their convictions;

Is science, faith or a mix of both giving direction to your theories
and the preferences that govern your embrace or rejection of others?


I would think that for most of us it would be either or both depending on what sort of theories you're talking about. Although most of everyone's belief must at some level come from faith that what you were told was correct, unless you personally investigate absolutely everything you have an opinion on.

I for example have strong opinions on the Taliban, despite having done no scientific inquiry regarding them at all, and having no concrete evidence proving that what I've been told about them is true, or that they exist, or even that Afghanistan exists.

(reference this chart in your assessment)


Through this basic essential understanding, we can collectively raise the bar across the board.


How will identifying whether our beliefs are faith-based or science-based raise the bar on ATS? My guess is that you're implying that we'll turn away from faith-based reasoning, but what if we don't agree that science-based reasoning is always preferable?



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Breath neo... lol this is about the time where badmedia pukes..... and we say "usualy they dont make it after this long in the matrix".

Isnt it funny that even though the machines didnt know this.... uhh we kinda did? i LOL at that fact alone....

We knew through our experaince that he would choose Trinity over helping the machines.... how is that outside of casulity... you are missunderstanding.

then agian maybe your path in causality... like the machines(AI)....left you without the current ability to understand this(neo saving trininty instead of banging random chicks for the machines.)


I don't suppose you happened to notice the part where all the different TV screens were in the room represented each different possibility/response he was thinking? Different dimensions, and then when he chooses one of them, it focuses in on that particular dimension?

Or did you happen to notice the fact that the architect narrows his choices down to 2 with the doors, which is a method of control as I mentioned before? Or that according to the architect, it would lead to the end of zion, but then the actual choices didn't matter, because it was really a last ditch effort of control.

Surely you figured out that the entire time, the whole thing was just in the consciousness of neo(it is not the spoon that bends, only yourself), and that the only battle was with himself? And that his realization of this is what lead him back to "source", aka god.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   


I don't suppose you happened to notice the part where all the different TV screens were in the room represented each different possibility/response he was thinking? Different dimensions, and then when he chooses one of them, it focuses in on that particular dimension?


but why couldnt they have already figured that out? i did right when the movie started.




Or did you happen to notice the fact that the architect narrows his choices down to 2 with the doors, which is a method of control as I mentioned before? Or that according to the architect, it would lead to the end of zion, but then the actual choices didn't matter, because it was really a last ditch effort of control.


Unless the next matrix movie has more explinations and they are shaping his personality through these specific experinces. Sometimes beliveing lies leads you to see truths in causalty/GOD.



Surely you figured out that the entire time, the whole thing was just in the consciousness of neo(it is not the spoon that bends, only yourself), and that the only battle was with himself? And that his realization of this is what lead him back to "source", aka god.


those experiances neo had made him choose what he did. now just because the machine dont deminstrate this knowledge does not mean that this wasnt all apart of the plan. It is his path to the top of the mountian. From there he would have to see why the river flows the way it does.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
but why couldnt they have already figured that out? i did right when the movie started.


Have you figured it out in your own reality?




Unless the next matrix movie has more explinations and they are shaping his personality through these specific experinces. Sometimes beliveing lies leads you to see truths in causalty/GOD.


Yes, but the experiences themselves are just an expression of deeper truths, or what I referred to earlier as the equation. If you focus only on the variables, you will be blind to the truth.

If I say that the matrix is real, and you focus on the variables, then you might think I mean we are controlled by machines and so on. Which is a bit crazy, and not at all what I mean. But if you can look into the deeper meanings of the movie, and see the philosophy(equations) being shown, then you might can see how the matrix is speaking truth in a way more real than anything. Then you can see how such things relate to our own relation, and how the entire movie was just a way of expressing philosophical questions that date back 1000's of years sometimes.

And really, thats what makes all those christians and people of "faith" so darned ignorant and hypocrites. Because they focus on the variables and fail to see the truth under it. Those who accept or reject based on the variables are equally wrong in not seeing the equation.

In this way, telling a lie is often a way of expressing the truth. As the movie the matrix is in itself a lie which expresses truth. You can have faith in such a lie all you want, people can run around saying the machines are real all they want, but don't think some people can't see the truth being expressed.



those experiances neo had made him choose what he did. now just because the machine dont deminstrate this knowledge does not mean that this wasnt all apart of the plan. It is his path to the top of the mountian. From there he would have to see why the river flows the way it does.


The machines have no consciousness. They are based soly on logic and causality. Have you ever done programming? Everything I do is based on causality. If they didn't, they wouldn't work. The machines basically represent a literal level of thinking.

Go ahead, give me the logic and casuality behind choice. Make a program that can honestly choose a random number, and I will make your rich, because it is something that to be truly random requires a choice, which no logic can create, only simulate.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   


Go ahead, give me the logic and casuality behind choice. Make a program that can honestly choose a random number, and I will make your rich, because it is something that to be truly random requires a choice, which no logic can create, only simulate.


Not even you can create a random number. You are a machine although a squishy one. All stimulation is based in causality there for all actions that come from it are determinable. Just like neo and the matrix.... you can understand why the life he led made him choose what it did. Once you experaince enough of causality you would understand why.

Do you learn anything here on this forum? becasue if you do, then that change in your personality is also based on casuality, because you might not have had the money or good fortune to be around the internet. that change affects the choices you make and what you find valuble.

The variable creates the equation... and the equation creates the variables. They are not separate. i adressed how your hunger variable could affect someones choices and even if their life continues.

edit: and yes i have figured it out. My emapthy doesnt allow me to not help people. that empathy comes from an understanding of causality. This is why im flying towards you. Jesus wanted you to understand what he did not mearly say his name and click your heels 3 times.



[edit on 6-1-2009 by Wertdagf]



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Not even you can create a random number. You are a machine although a squishy one. All stimulation is based in causality there for all actions that come from it are determinable. Just like neo and the matrix.... you can understand why the life he led made him choose what it did. Once you experaince enough of causality you would understand why.


A machine I am not. I think, therefore I am. I am is god. I am god, and so are you(assuming you are conscious).

John 14:20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.



Do you learn anything here on this forum? becasue if you do, then that change in your personality is also based on casuality, because you might not have had the money or good fortune to be around the internet. that change affects the choices you make and what you find valuble.


Maybe someday you will learn the difference between the ride, and those who ride the ride. Sorry, I am not the ride, I am the rider. I am not the observation, I am the observer. Again, assuming you are actually conscious, then this is also true of you.



The variable creates the equation... and the equation creates the variables. They are not separate. i adressed how your hunger variable could affect someones choices and even if their life continues.


Could affect, and always will affect are 2 different things. And the life of the ride starts when you get on it, and ends when you get off it. The ride was never alive or dead, the only life on board were the riders which come and go as they please.



edit: and yes i have figured it out. My emapthy doesnt allow me to not help people. that empathy comes from an understanding of causality. This is why im flying towards you. Jesus wanted you to understand what he did not mearly say his name and click your heels 3 times.


You should read the story of Job. In which Satan purposes that Job is merely the product of his environment, in which if his environment changed, Job would also surely change as well. And of course, Job doesn't. Now I don't want to sit around and argue if the literal story of Job is true or not - similiar to arguing if the matrix is true or not, I don't really care. But it is still essentially the same argument we are having now.

There is a degree of causality which is true, but to say it is the entire truth is false. In Job's case, because his farm and everything went to ruins, it caused him to adapt. But it never truly causes him to break down at his base and core to what he truly is. It never changes the fact that he is the observer, the one who chooses and so on.

Causality is the same thing as your reap what you sow. And this is true of the universe, of which science is best for explaining. But again, you can still choose what you sow, and of course, you choose that because of what you can reap from it.. While reasons and such may exist and had an effect on what you choose, it did not decide for you. The possibility to choose otherwise in spite of the causes was still there.

Causality is the ride, the universe, science and the logic of it. However, I am not the product of it, I am the consumer of it.

[edit on 6-1-2009 by badmedia]



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 05:50 PM
link   


There is a degree of causality which is true, but to say it is the entire truth is false. In Job's case, because his farm and everything went to ruins, it caused him to adapt. But it never truly causes him to break down at his base and core to what he truly is. It never changes the fact that he is the observer, the one who chooses and so on.


If he truly understood then there would be no reason for him to break down... and i would know this if i saw his life... It would then indeed be a product of causality.

The understanding that he gained came from the life he lived.. and in turn what he belived.

Its reap what you sow... its in heaven as on earth... its forgive our sins as we forgive those who sin against us..... as above so below...

This is the nature of causality/GOD



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf


There is a degree of causality which is true, but to say it is the entire truth is false. In Job's case, because his farm and everything went to ruins, it caused him to adapt. But it never truly causes him to break down at his base and core to what he truly is. It never changes the fact that he is the observer, the one who chooses and so on.


If he truly understood then there would be no reason for him to break down... and i would know this if i saw his life... It would then indeed be a product of causality.

The understanding that he gained came from the life he lived.. and in turn what he belived.

Its reap what you sow... its in heaven as on earth... its forgive our sins as we forgive those who sin against us..... as above so below...

This is the nature of causality/GOD


The nature of god, is not god. My nature is not me. That I respond to you, is not me, it is my nature. As I said before, these things are the nature of the creation we find ourselves in.

It's not that complicated really. See, in the eyes of god all is known. As such, the universe is static. There is no "time" Nothing changes, nothing moves because all is already known and viewed at once. There of course is no causality because there is nothing in this creation that moves.

Only when perception and consciousness is limited and only a part of that knowledge is used at once does causality and creation as we know it exist. Time exists only as an illusion of limited perception. As new information provided by time becomes available, is casuality even possible, the same with actions and reactions because these things require change and "time". If you take a movie film, view it all at once, time and such does not exist. Limit the perception to a frame by frame basis, run them over and over, and you have "runtime".

Once you choose to enter the "ride" and take on a limited perception, at that point are you inside creation and at that point does casuality and such actually take place.

I'm sure you've probably heard that nobody can actually see all of god and still exist. This is because you would have to lose the limited perception that is a requirement of being in this reality/creation as it is to being with. As you lost the limited perception, so to do realities based on limited perception.

Just as if a poker game is no longer a poker game if you don't limit the perception of the cards and keep them face down.

The ride is nothing more than conscious though, a "what if", and then we hop on the ride just to see "what if".



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Now your starting to sound like Mabus....

i dare you to watch The structure of the universe

Your saying you are free from causality but the only reason you give is becasue you know your a magical starchild, that you have a magical soul that is on a rollercoaster... and somehow that proves that casuality is no part of your personality.

Regardless of what is beyond life or was before.., we have no proof.

How a poker game goes with or without the cards revealed is still based on causality...

understanding casuality is not a limited perception... it actualy takes more thinking when it comes to reality, i cant just say "jesus jesus god god starchild soul" and have it explain anything.

I have look into peoples live and understand their thoughts and emotions based on previous experiances to help them. i have to give poeple proof based on their own lives to unravel ignorance as to why events and anguish exists in their lives. somone who is a parrot cannot do this.... they would mearly say "your a soul that doesnt realy exist here, so everythings ok!, god loves you" that does not help anyone with their problems... it doesnt help them understand why it is they experiance these emotions or difficultys.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Now your starting to sound like Mabus....

i dare you to watch The structure of the universe



Seen it already. I watch all that stuff. Even when I don't agree with them, I still look for truth in what is being said.



Your saying you are free from causality but the only reason you give is becasue you know your a magical starchild, that you have a magical soul that is on a rollercoaster... and somehow that proves that casuality is no part of your personality.


Nope, I have choice. That is what free's me from causality. The problem with causality and it's control is choice.



Regardless of what is beyond life or was before.., we have no proof.


Nope, can't prove the nonphysical with the physical. It's an understanding of things that brings knowledge of it.



How a poker game goes with or without the cards revealed is still based on causality...


But the causality changes and the illusion of the game is all created based on limited perception. Which was my point. If you allow everyone to see the cards, then the game no longer exists. It's just an example of how you reduce your perception on things for fun and for an experience.



understanding casuality is not a limited perception... it actualy takes more thinking when it comes to reality, i cant just say "jesus jesus god god starchild soul" and have it explain anything.


I didn't say understanding it was, I said it is caused by a limited perception, and is only present within a limited perception.



I have look into peoples live and understand their thoughts and emotions based on previous experiances to help them. i have to give poeple proof based on their own lives to unravel ignorance as to why events and anguish exists in their lives. somone who is a parrot cannot do this.... they would mearly say "your a soul that doesnt realy exist here, so everythings ok!, god loves you" that does not help anyone with their problems... it doesnt help them understand why it is they experiance these emotions or difficultys.


I think you just don't see the difference between the ride and the rider. Yes, understanding the ride and casuality is needed and helpful. It's things like that which allow for technology and such. If not for the rules and laws of casuality, this reality could not actually exist. I don't disagree that there is casuality, I have said many times it is what the universe/creation is based on. And yes, as such our reality, and choices are limited to these things.

How can someone help themselves or understand anything if they are just victims of causation? If causation were true, then there would be nothing they could do to change things.

Again, it's about putting things into their proper place, not a matter if such things exist or not.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 07:08 PM
link   


How can someone help themselves or understand anything if they are just victims of causation? If causation were true, then there would be nothing they could do to change things.


This logic is flawed. Even if you were to see all of this resolution of reality and udnerstand all of how it works like the back of your hand.. you would still be a product of a larger causality..

Your stating without any proof that you know for a fact that when you DIE where ever you end up has nothing to do with cause and effect. No religious text says this, i would like to know where you get this mystical soul stuff.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
This logic is flawed. Even if you were to see all of this resolution of reality and udnerstand all of how it works like the back of your hand.. you would still be a product of a larger causality..


Only in a perspective that is limited. You have to take a look from the perspective of God, or from the perspective that knows all and has no time.



Your stating without any proof that you know for a fact that when you DIE where ever you end up has nothing to do with cause and effect. No religious text says this, i would like to know where you get this mystical soul stuff.


I never said that. All I stated is that causality and what you truly are is not the same thing. That consciousness is not a product of the creation, and that the observer is not the same thing as what is observed.

While in this creation/universe, then you are subject to these laws. The same way when you are at the poker table, you are subject to the rules of the game. But that doesn't make you part of the game, it makes you the player. Yes, because in the game AA is a great starting hand, it will cause me to play it differenty than 7/2 off suited. But these things are only valid in the game, and the ultimate choice is made by the player/consciousness.

I've created poker AI, and all they did was follow logic I gave it. If this, then do this. If that, then do that. causality, a machine. I had bots playing other bots, changed the settings around on what hands they would play and such, just to see what happened. But there was no consciousness to play the 7/2 and go all in with it if it wants and goes beyond the logic that was given to it. The only way the bot would do that, is if I programmed it to do it, because it is subject only to causality and has no free will or choice. The closest thign you can do to simulate choice is to pop a random number, say between 1 and 100, if you want it to seem to choose something 20% of the time, then I say if random number < 20, then do these, else do this. I can even set ranges. But it's not a choice at all. In this way, choice is merely an illusion created by those with power(me), between those without(the bots). But despite your claims, I am not a bot.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   
So what was it you watched or read(cause) to make you think that your soul is free from casuality (effect).

What is this information that you have such blind faith in. Your only example is that of a poker game... yet even professionals that play poker use ODDS to base their plays on... they would not go all in without a reason based on statistics... if they did then im shure you could easily make such a poor AI.

It took 20-50+ years for these machines(poker players) to develope this memory database and logic capacity.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
So what was it you watched or read(cause) to make you think that your soul is free from casuality (effect).


An experience called life. I'm certainly not free from casuality today, as I am in a limited perspective the same as you, but I do realize the choice in order to play the game.



What is this information that you have such blind faith in. Your only example is that of a poker game... yet even professionals that play poker use ODDS to base their plays on... they would not go all in without a reason based on statistics... if they did then im shure you could easily make such a poor AI.

It took 20-50+ years for these machines(poker players) to develope this memory database and logic capacity.


Professionals choose to use odds as a tool that brings them the highest rate of success. But any hand in poker can win, even if the hand isn't actually better than the losing hand. If you get a good read on a player, then you won't be using odds very much. Odds are mostly used when you are on a draw. If I have an open ended straight flush draw, I have alot of ways to improve my hand, so my chances/odds increase. And so then if someone bets only a small % of the pot, say $5 on a $100 pot, then what you do is look at the % of the cost to stay in the hand and how much you can win, against what your chances are of improving the hand. They use odds as a way of making the best choice on how to play there hands. They are not the game, they are the players. The game works on the rules, the players try to make the best choices on the rules.



posted on Jan, 6 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Mine is based on maths


what els can i say?

what is my theory? we live in something alive and the dna of life is not maths but maths points to a higher level of understanding of the universe..

yes i am crazy....



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join