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 Atheists Mostly Left Brained?

page: 9
15
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by ExistenceUnknown
 


Do you accept the Big Bang theory?


I accept it as a possible explanation to the origins of the Universe. I am not dogmatic in my belief in TBB though.

As far as God vs. TBB goes, I think that there is more evidence for TBB. We will never be able to rule out a God/Divine Being though.

edit for spelling

[edit on 19-5-2009 by ExistenceUnknown]




posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by MatrixProphet
 

==========================
Are Atheists Mostly Left Brained?
==========================

We all create a narrative , a coherent belief system, with which we attempt to maintain a sense of continuity to our lives. This probably has its roots in pre-history, before the dawn of the written word ,a time when we were story tellers with an oral tradition. .
This maintenance of a coherent , continuous narrative or belief system, is apparently done largely by the Left Hemisphere .

The Left Hemisphere incorporates any new experiences into the pre-existing belief system. Anything which does not fit -in with our narrative , is denied by our Left Hemisphere , with the anomaly sweep aside.

This tendency is countered by the Right Hemisphere .

The Right Hemisphere challenges the narrative & status quo . Once a discrepancy becomes unbearably large and obvious , the Right Hemisphere instigates a complete revision of the belief system .

I would liken this , to somebody revising their belief in religion, seeing the discrepancy between science and religious dogma for example.. You no doubt could see the opposite being the case i.e somebody moving from atheism to theism.

I guess it depends on what you regard as anomalous.


Self deception is kept in check by its parallel hemisphere .

So is the self deception manifest, by a belief, or disbelief, in a Supernatural being .......?

For me , it is the Supernatural explanation , that is the anomaly , by its very definition.With blind faith purported as a virtue - the ultimate manifestation of self deception ..... IMHO.


===================================
The medical condition anosognosia highlights this distinction between the hemispheres.

This phenomenon can be seen in stroke victims . If the person has suffered the loss of Right Hemisphere function , the intact Left Hemisphere is free to engage in its denial , without the counter-balance . Without the parallel hemisphere playing "devils advocate "
the narrative goes unchecked and can become quite delusional .

We are capable of telling ourselves quite a few yarns to make it through the day. I`d go as so far as to say , its necessary , but when these beliefs, find there way into the foreign policies of nuclear armed countries etc , they must be countered . And hopefully they will be countered with logic and reason ~ not with opposing religious beliefs .

This short U Tube video , provides a stunning example of anosognosia and the Left /Right brain dichotomy. The concepts expressed above are found within this video.



A fascinating 10 minutes , IMHO.


Perhaps it is the "believers" that are Right Hemisphere impaired .
, less willing to question the anomalous narrative .
We may very well be wired differently.
Nice to see the subject atheism/theism , couched in the language of neuroscience, its refreshing .


Edit to add: I am willing to change my narrative , but a tipping point of sorts would have to be experienced . This is probably true of atheist and theist alike .
......... , well at least thats "my story " and i`m sticking with it ...


[edit on 19-5-2009 by UmbraSumus]



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by benzon
 



MY GOD that is so American! Im sorry but why does christians always want everyone to think what they think? Why can't you just give up your bedtime stories and accept that the only God in the world is James Hetfield from Metallica?

Im sorry if its a little offensive, but i really hate Catholism. REALLY!

The Catholic Church is a bunch of money hungry assholes, and if someone controdicts them, then they are hethens and infedales and what not.
Well guess wha - I am the hethen king!


And you are talking to whom? I hope you read the OP (which is doesn't sound like you did). Or is this trolling?

With that said, I couldn't agree with you more!!



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by miragezero
 



I am not sad about being atheist or weak agnostic, though... so come out of the box and reinvent a god to believe in and that woudl make me happy? "search out an unknown that man cannot create"? Well you're creating it yourself in that case... and yes it sounds delusional. There is simply no evidence that there is anything out there not subject to physical law. There is no evidence for the supernatural. That is the crux of the matter.



It seems the majority of scientists would disagree with you. For MOST believe in something greater than ourselves created or started life! I am in good company for Einstein considered it, greatly.

What do you think started life? This obviously would include the first molecules and crystals.

Do YOU know who, what, or it, inhabits or fills all the dark universe? Do YOU know more than the actual astronomers? What is your personal experience with multi-dimensional universes?

If you have all the answers to the above questions then I would listen very carefully to your insight, but as it stands, I acknowledge those who have the intelligence to acknowledge that life had it's start by something who had some sort of consciousness, whatever you choose to call it.

In this case delusional seems to be the smarter way.


[edit on 19-5-2009 by MatrixProphet]



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Maybe I made my post too long - I would like a comment from the OP.

Religion is left brain (belief) - spiritualism is right brain (possibility).

I'm right brain dominant and would say I'm basically an atheist - I'm actually agnostic, but the way most people understand God - well, I see no evidence.

I don't really consider myself spiritual - but I am very definitely a philosopher.

The big bang is a fairly crappy theory - but you can't rule out a quantum event any more than you can rule out divine creation - can't be tested.

Modern physics is complete trash - some crucial information regarding the nature of space or vacuum if you like, has been covered up. Science has become more dogmatic than religion - we cannot move forward with scientific knowledge until 'peer review' (or more like peer patronage) gets a shot of cyanide.

EDIT: What I mean regarding physics is that you cannot go back and do credible work on atomic structure, neither can you question Einstein and expect to have any support.

Both the model of the atom and relativity are flawed - but if you say "Einstein might have got it wrong", then its goodbye to your career. The media and social pressure created by the cult of Einstein generate so much pressure that if he WAS wrong - it will be almost impossible to discover it for years and years.

Left brain thinking is alive and well in religion and in science.

[edit on 19-5-2009 by Amagnon]



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Amagnon
 


I appreciate your post, but I like to take it a step further than textbook! Beyond the neurological or chemical and physical aspects to this question.

It is this arena that I work in - behavioral science. I find that most (incl. psychologists and psychiatrists) do not understand the right brain.

I acknowledged earlier that I am simplifying this whole thing. This would simplify it for all those other than the academics and those who work in neurological science.

Left brain is the reasoning center and right brain is the feeling center. I noticed you didn't mention this?

Where do you think these feelings or characteristics came from?

Guilt
Shame
Joy
Sadness
Anger
Grief
Imagination
Senses

Or do they magically come from thin air?

Our conscience is made up of our left brain and right brain. Okay?

Guilt is centered in the left brain "knowing" that you did something wrong. Right brain "feels" that you did something wrong, this is called; shame. It is attached to our feelings and this is why those who work mostly out of a dominant right brain can be more emotional than those who are more analytical.


Why I say that the most intelligent use "actively" both sides?

If a person does not shut down their right brain which is the feeling center, then this person will have better access to healthier judgments and synthesis. This is where a person can be more sensitive to higher conscious levels.

If one is healthy and is individuated (authentic), this person will have better access to both sides and will be able to develop high abstract reasoning. High abstract reasoning must involve both sides. Why? Because our "senses" which come from the right side is an invaluable partnership with our logic.

A person who relies on their analytical mind will often discount their feelings as not having much worth. Yet, it is these very feelings that help us to judge the quality of our life!

I find that those who don't acknowledge their "feelings" or minimize them or don't really understand the right brain, are those who NEED to be guided by FACTS and are not as comfortable with abstract perception, and philosophy. They NEED life, and answers to life, to be more black and white.

Clinical depression is caused not only by a chemical imbalance in the brain but also by those who lose their sense of reality and have pushed their feelings down. The first emotion to go down before depression is: anger! If anger is suppressed long enough a person will eventually go into depression.

Unfortunately, psychology in the traditional sense is behind in human behavior unless one educates themselves beyond the narrow aspects of textbook psychology. A huge component in school is left out: ADDICTION. Most don't know a thing about it and hence, will misdiagnose someone. I see it all the time!

It is also ironic that I always have psychologists as clients in that their left brain textbook information could not handle their feelings! So they come to me to have me help them with their feelings which are governed by life.


Now to the tests: they are hardly accurate! Because they don't take into consideration the feelings aspect of things which is a crucial component. Often the tests are left brain in composition.

Most atheists I hear, and live with, are NOT very in touch with their feelings and would rather discount them above their analytical mind. But BOTH sides are important. We need the left brain computer chip, but we are shallow without the depth that the right brain gives us. So I often find that there are "blocks" with atheists that they aren't even aware exist.

The best of psychologists are those who understand human behavior in a non-textbook setting!


Here is a book (I can recommend many others) that will help you and WERF to understand the right brain more:

"Emotional Intelligence" Why it can matter more than IQ. The Groundbreaking Book That Redefines What it Means to be Smart!
By Daniel Goleman PHD




[edit on 19-5-2009 by MatrixProphet]



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Amagnon
 



Star for you! Outstanding post!



Religion is left brain (belief) - spiritualism is right brain (possibility).

I'm right brain dominant and would say I'm basically an atheist - I'm actually agnostic, but the way most people understand God - well, I see no evidence.

I don't really consider myself spiritual - but I am very definitely a philosopher.



Which tells me that you are more broad in your thinking. This is a good sign.

Where I find atheists and agnostics are confused is in applying nothing but left brain reasoning to an unreasonable situation. So this would then require higher abstract reasoning that I just mentioned to you earlier.

Get the meaning?

This is one of the blocks that you all may have. Applying rational understandings to irrational concepts.

To be a good behavioral scientist a person MUST understand this concept. Why? Because we can draw the wrong conclusions or diagnosis otherwise.

The right brain may also have facts, but not ones that are provable to the analytical thinker. I am very analytical!! But...I also have a strong right brain. I am also an author, artist and spiritual scientist. I MUST have good access to both sides.

Those who don't, often are too rigid or too wishy washy. Make sense?


The big bang is a fairly crappy theory - but you can't rule out a quantum event any more than you can rule out divine creation - can't be tested.


Good for you! This shows brillaince! I learn all the time from atheists. For they can be (if not puppets) very knowledgeable. But to be humble means to know our limitations. Right?


Modern physics is complete trash - some crucial information regarding the nature of space or vacuum if you like, has been covered up. Science has become more dogmatic than religion - we cannot move forward with scientific knowledge until 'peer review' (or more like peer patronage) gets a shot of cyanide.

EDIT: What I mean regarding physics is that you cannot go back and do credible work on atomic structure, neither can you question Einstein and expect to have any support.



If I could kiss you I would (I'm female, hehehe). Thank you for saying the family secret out loud!!

There is junk science, psychology and religion.


Both the model of the atom and relativity are flawed - but if you say "Einstein might have got it wrong", then its goodbye to your career. The media and social pressure created by the cult of Einstein generate so much pressure that if he WAS wrong - it will be almost impossible to discover it for years and years.




Left brain thinking is alive and well in religion and in science.



So...God/It/Source/Creator may actually have more validity once you leave the junk out. That is what I fervently try to help people do, as I had to do. I was in just as much of a prison as most here.

Thank you very much!



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by MatrixProphet
reply to post by miragezero
 



I am not sad about being atheist or weak agnostic, though... so come out of the box and reinvent a god to believe in and that woudl make me happy? "search out an unknown that man cannot create"? Well you're creating it yourself in that case... and yes it sounds delusional. There is simply no evidence that there is anything out there not subject to physical law. There is no evidence for the supernatural. That is the crux of the matter.



It seems the majority of scientists would disagree with you. For MOST believe in something greater than ourselves created or started life! I am in good company for Einstein considered it, greatly.

What do you think started life? This obviously would include the first molecules and crystals.

Do YOU know who, what, or it, inhabits or fills all the dark universe? Do YOU know more than the actual astronomers? What is your personal experience with multi-dimensional universes?

If you have all the answers to the above questions then I would listen very carefully to your insight, but as it stands, I acknowledge those who have the intelligence to acknowledge that life had it's start by something who had some sort of consciousness, whatever you choose to call it.

In this case delusional seems to be the smarter way.


[edit on 19-5-2009 by MatrixProphet]


Well we do all live in a multi-dimensional universe so I guess I have had many years of experience with it... but more to the point a lack of explanation of everything in the universe at the moment is not evidence of God or anything supernatural. Do you understand? A lack of information is not evidence of god. For example, either the Sun is a being that is drawn across the sky by a chariot or it is not. Now we have proven that it is not because someone before either doubted that or through the slow return of scientific knowledge it became more and more silly to think that it was what... supernatural. How many of these steps do we have to climb before there is so little left that COULD be supernatural. You are throwing dark matter at me to make a case for supernatural occurance, when it is in fact part of many theories regarding our universe which follows physical law. Science is always at a disadvantage in this type of arugment. You want immediate answers for everything provided, completely disregarding thousands of years of answers already verified and yet can offer no evidence whatsoever of any claim of the supernatural. Believe what you like, but knowing is a different story.



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Welfhard
 


I guess... i have no idea what its called, i mean its just beliefs, right?

The world is a better place without religion. christ has done nothing for any of you, and you know it as well as i do.



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by miragezero
 



You are throwing dark matter at me to make a case for supernatural occurance, when it is in fact part of many theories regarding our universe which follows physical law. Science is always at a disadvantage in this type of arugment. You want immediate answers for everything provided, completely disregarding thousands of years of answers already verified and yet can offer no evidence whatsoever of any claim of the supernatural. Believe what you like, but knowing is a different story.



You make good points here, ironically for both of us! Do you know that?

Spirituality is always at a disadvantage here also, because like science, so much is on faith and ones perceptions and or beliefs.

No, I don't want immediate answers because I already know that much is up to interpretation. I believe in science and believe that it is nothing without philosophy to move forward.

We question, which drives us to look for answers. Since not all answers come in a physical sense, then that leaves our other senses.

I think the more direct question would be: why not God/It/Source/Creator/Grand PooBaw Scientist in the sky? What is preventing Him/It being a reality?

Think on this if you would for a moment. Leave all religion and its books out of the answer. Leave childhood religious abuse out of the answer. Leave out God is cruel out of the answer. If we leave all prejudice behind, what is left?

What is the plausibility SCIENTIFICALLY that God (or whatever you want to call it) does not exist. Now what is the possibility that there was, or is, a power with consciousness that started life?



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by MatrixProphet
 



What is the plausibility SCIENTIFICALLY that God (or whatever you want to call it) does not exist. Now what is the possibility that there was, or is, a power with consciousness that started life?


Well wouldnt god be life? what created god? How did god come to be?

It is a good question. God is plausible, but if a power with consciousness is needed to create life with consciousness, then where did the creating force with consciousness come from..... because before that power with consciousness there was no consciousness?

Regardless of all that, You have a interesting thread going my friend. I have learned something new about the whole right brain/left brain ordeal, although I feel that too much emphasis is being placed on the right/left brain.


Take care.



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
I consider myself Atheist.
I think that the concept of god is unnecessary.
I have no need for an explanation of or for life.
I accept that the universe is consciousness but have no need to further question it or philosophize about it. It simply is.
And no, I don’t think that this universal consciousness is any sort of “god unit”. If anything each of us is our own “god unit”.
It appears that the prime directive of consciousness is to create.
Those who do not put effort into creating their lives sink to the bottom of the social pool, and we mistakenly call them underprivileged instead of under motivated..
I accept those so-called supernatural events as being totally natural.
I don’t consider myself “spiritual” and don’t understand what other people think that is. It just sounds meaningful.
I hear people say that humans are, “body, mind and soul”, but they don’t seem to be able to define “soul”. They do however seem to be very fearful of losing it. I have to wonder how they would know if they lost it, if they do not know what it is.
My profession was a heavily involved with so-called left brained activity, but then it also needed reasoning. Does that make it a balanced activity?
I am now retired and spending time developing my skills as an artist. After years of inactivity in this area I find that creative ideas just do not flow like they used to.
I was also involved in music, and a friend & I spend a couple of years writing songs.
With a little effort I could be very ambidextrous.

So how do I run my life? Pretty much the same way as I run my car; all actions are based the rules of the road using visual and auditory input and the feel of the road.



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by UmbraSumus
 


Thank you so much for this video! I thought it was excellent. Thank you for going to so much work. A star for you!

It is a situation where "sides" can be easily formed to establish black or white thinking. This is exactly the sort of issues I work with daily in my work, albeit, not on the medical level but on the human experience level.

Man works out of levels of awareness and denial. Depending on a persons programming this can really vary. Most will go to any length to protect their denial or what is causing the denial.

This creates self deception, supported by programming we all receive while children. Since most are comfortable in their comfort zones of beliefs and existence, they find no need to change. Even with many indicators that it would be in their best interest if they would.

This is because of one major reason: security comes from a familiarity of a ritual, which is completely self-contained. Hence, why people don't change!!!

Conditioning can take place within a family for multi-generations. I can interview a family because one member comes to me for depression. It is not surprising to find that in some families ALL members are clinically depressed. Why? Do they all have chemical imbalances? Not necessarily, but some were conditioned in a family environment to be: depressed!

Body language will always give a person away as to their state of lying or even health. But if most are not trained to "see" the lie, or dysfunction, this person will actually believe that they are fooling everyone. They believe their own lie!! This then leads to sociopathic behavior.

So this then brings up the troublesome disorder called: Self-Defeating Personality Disorder. Compound this with all the studies being done on society and we have society that is becoming more and more disassociated.

Now, on the religious end. Yes, this can be predetermined and conditioned by family or other authorities in ones life. Since religion works so much off the information end (left brain) this can (but not always) help a person to stay in denial because they can use the authority of religion as a boundary, and not always a healthy boundary.

Spiritual or God connection does not necessarily work in the same way, unless a person makes a religion of it. This of course applies to atheists, Buddhists etc, also. Anytime hard and fast rules, or teachings, box someone in, it can lead to a separation from our "senses" which tells us something is wrong, or feels wrong, to absolute dedication, in spite of indicators showing us otherwise.

So if we don't have a balance between our analytical side and emotional side, we can develop into fanatics regardless of the belief system we are talking about. Ie, black and white fanaticism to the point where our feelings or senses are not considered, to being overly emotional or impressionable, going with every suggestion given to us.

Thank you again!



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Quoting pure evil: “It is a good question. God is plausible, but if a power with consciousness is needed to create life with consciousness, then where did the creating force with consciousness come from..... because before that power with consciousness there was no consciousness? “

****You are assuming that there was no consciousness and that it had to be created.
All that is always was. Consciousness creates and recreates. Nothing is ever created or destroyed, it just get recycled. Our finite minds cannot conceive of a universe with no beginning and no end. Can anyone truly trace anything to its beginning?



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Originally posted by OhZone



****You are assuming that there was no consciousness and that it had to be created.
All that is always was. Consciousness creates and recreates. Nothing is ever created or destroyed, it just get recycled. Our finite minds cannot conceive of a universe with no beginning and no end. Can anyone truly trace anything to its beginning?


You assume that I assume.


I would tend to agree with you. I was thinking in terms if god is there, where was his start. If no god, then where did we get our start? either way, it is unanswerable...

I was merely thinking aloud, I did quite like both of your posts on this page though. I tend to lean the same way. Always thinking though.


[edit on 19-5-2009 by pureevil81]



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by pureevil81
 



Well wouldnt god be life? what created god? How did god come to be?

It is a good question. God is plausible, but if a power with consciousness is needed to create life with consciousness, then where did the creating force with consciousness come from..... because before that power with consciousness there was no consciousness?


Yes, we can establish that life exists and got its start somewhere. Most scientists don't seem to have a problem with a power with consciousness being around to develop life. For where did consciousness come from? Matter is one thing, but consciousness is another.

If I knew the answer to where did God/Creator/It/Source/Scientist Beyond Comprehension come from, I along with many people would run to get the book published. But then again, I am only human. I am learning from you all more about science than I ever thought I would need to know!


Hopefully, I can share insight in a different direction than most are thinking.

You U2U'd me with valid points. Here is my response:

If we hold up a mirror and told people that they are stupid and less intelligent for believing in a power greater than ourselves, what would the mirror reflect back? In essence, that is what I am doing with this thread.

I starred you, thanks!!



posted on May, 19 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by MatrixProphet

Spirituality is always at a disadvantage here also, because like science, so much is on faith and ones perceptions and or beliefs.


The burden of proof lies on the claimant.


Originally posted by MatrixProphet

We question, which drives us to look for answers. Since not all answers come in a physical sense, then that leaves our other senses.


There is no evidence that we have other senses. If we did something useful/profitable would have been done with them by now.


Originally posted by MatrixProphet

I think the more direct question would be: why not God/It/Source/Creator/Grand PooBaw Scientist in the sky? What is preventing Him/It being a reality?


What is preventing Santa from being real?



Originally posted by MatrixProphet
Think on this if you would for a moment. Leave all religion and its books out of the answer. Leave childhood religious abuse out of the answer. Leave out God is cruel out of the answer. If we leave all prejudice behind, what is left?


Us. That's all. Your brain and a desire to probe, study and measure.



Originally posted by MatrixProphet
What is the plausibility SCIENTIFICALLY that God (or whatever you want to call it) does not exist.


Impossible argument. Prove to me that a purple people eater does not orbit a star in a parallel universe... scientifically.


Originally posted by MatrixProphet
Now what is the possibility that there was, or is, a power with consciousness that started life?


Impossible argument.











posted on May, 20 2009 @ 07:00 AM
link   
Beliefs and truth are the most evil concepts ever created, and they are purely left brain thinking.

The concept of truth has destroyed much of the possible knowledge that mankind could aspire to know. The loss of this knowledge is an horrific crime - and one in which we have all been guilty.

For this reason I avoid any belief, or system of beliefs - regardless if it is religious, scientific, moral or social.

The belief, truth system is digital - true = 1, false = 0. If we treat everything like that - then we are missing the infinite divisions of possibility between zero and one.

When you convert a piece of data into truth - you destroy its context, reference to its source and eliminate further testing of its validity within differing frames of reference.

In other words - when you find truth, you stop looking. When you encounter data that conflicts with it, it is discarded as false - often unconsciously - you don't even get a conscious chance to test the new data for validity - because your unconscious mind has already made the decision.

Belief is the next step up from truth - it is using a set of truths and applying them in a framework to create reality. Are you God? Can you really create reality out of nothing? This set of truths steps up the filtering of new data, and also may cause older data to be reclassified as false.

All data has validity within the frame of reference in which it was created and with respect to its source. This doesn't make it beyond question - it doesn't become true simply because it passes a few basic tests, or can't be tested - neither does it become false because it fails a few tests.

An example of how ignorant we all are can be demonstrated very easily. If I ask someone if they know what a computer is, the answer will likely be in the affirmative. Now have a look at the computer in front of you - you know something about it right? Ok - now go and build one then, or even draw one - tell me how an LCD screen works, a chip, the electronic components how they work and are made, who made them, when were they made, what is their chemical composition, what IS a chemical composition, what do their atoms look like, what is an atom, how much energy is confined in an atom, where do atoms come from, who made the atoms .. the list of very simple questions could go on forever - and the list of answers would likely be short and very sketchy.

People are likely to consider it unfair to ask who built their computer for example (and I would want a name). Of course questions of that nature can be basically unknowable - but the questions are extremely simple. Why do we ignore this massive amount of information we don't know, and focus on what we do?

So in light of this unknown stuff about everything, how can we assert that we know what is true and what isn't - basically we don't know ANYTHING - yet we can stupidly assert that some piece of data is either true or false - and based on that we throw away a whole heap of data that doesn't agree with what we know to be 'true'.

We don't even seem to experience reality directly - but rather all data gets turned into electrical signals in our nervous system, and then interpreted by a black box inside our head - if we don't even experience it directly - how the hell can we assert we know what it is or isn't in a purely black and white way?

Whats the alternative then? Its simple - acknowledge in your own mind that you really don't know anything - accept all data as a possibility. Instead of building beliefs on this knowledge, try and find meaning in its patterns instead.

Keep a clean mind by changing it often.

[edit on 20-5-2009 by Amagnon]



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a study was completed that showed 98% of card carrying atheists dont like disco. eg,trust your OWN experiences only.



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Amagnon
 



Beliefs and truth are the most evil concepts ever created, and they are purely left brain thinking.



Along with right brain emotions attached to them. But why be so black and white?


The concept of truth has destroyed much of the possible knowledge that mankind could aspire to know. The loss of this knowledge is an horrific crime - and one in which we have all been guilty.



Thank goodness not all would agree. There is truth and then there is truth. I am glad that it hasn't stopped medical advancement!

We have learned a great deal from past philosophers and men of knowledge. Do we now think that the earth is square? Have we gone from it being flat, to round, to now square?

There ARE truths that we can sink our teeth into.


For this reason I avoid any belief, or system of beliefs - regardless if it is religious, scientific, moral or social.


Are you atheist or agnostic? These are labels, and if you use one of them then you subscribe to the beliefs associated with them.



When you convert a piece of data into truth - you destroy its context, reference to its source and eliminate further testing of its validity within differing frames of reference.

In other words - when you find truth, you stop looking. When you encounter data that conflicts with it, it is discarded as false - often unconsciously - you don't even get a conscious chance to test the new data for validity - because your unconscious mind has already made the decision.



You think that all wise people do this? Who are you using as your frame of reference? I will allow that the average person does this, but many of us are anything but average.


Here is how most people tend to reason: "I can't change my mind because I have dedicated myself to this belief. I can't change religions because I am a third generation..... My family has always done it this way."

When a person recovers from this conditioning they can then "change their mind!" Leaving a family system can be very difficult to do, but not impossible.

I find that many who express the thoughts that you have are those who have been disillusioned by what you have been involved in. My advice would be to do the opposite of what you are doing now.

Meaning: change this thinking and be willing to explore areas that you would never think to explore earlier. You are buying into a trap of mediocrity. The greatest minds never truly give up. They keep searching. You just haven't found that which stimulates you enough to gain more conviction.

Conviction gets you through life rather than mediocrity or redundancy.

Do I walk my talk? Please listen:


I walked away from a multi-million dollar corporation that I co-owned. I walked away from family (mother, brother, aunt & uncle etc.) because I could no longer be part of the system - the religious system. I left whole belief systems behind along with friends. Hedonism, for I had been very hedonistic and worldly. I used addictions to try to meet my needs. I no longer do (for more than 20 years).

In parts of my life I was a Bible thumper and minister, yada, yada. I lived in extremes!! I walked away. I knew my former way did not work!

I am smart enough to know to analyze what works for me and what doesn't. Nothing is written in stone. This you have to get over. Otherwise, you will become hopeless and helpless. But again, its a choice. You will never convince me of your wisdom. I have walked too many roads to know that there is SOME truth and little truth to what you are saying.

It sounds like you have been very disappointed in life, welcome to my world. Discover another one!




top topics



 
15
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join