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.

 

There Is No Such Thing As Non-Physical Reality!

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
How do we know? From the Absurdist perspective, we strive (much as the OP has or is doing) to make sense of what we are all experiencing right now, this thing called life. What is so absurd is that we will never be able to figure the big question out from this current perspective. So all of this searching and thinking and yes OP your hypothesis too is nothing more than a trip down a blind alley at the end of which we are surrounded on three sides by a brick wall. So dear OP, I hate to break it to you, but negation destroys every hypothesis, every theory until you are left with one big I don't know. Negation, aint it a bitch!
edit on 30-7-2012 by HEYJOSE because: I changed hope for hate Hope for change, you may hate it when it comes.




posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
may very well be the pseudo-philosophical basis for the major acts of mass murder and genocide to be perpetrated during the 21st century


If this sensationalist nonsense helps you sleep better at night, so you can enjoy your dreams in peace, then by all means, paint as many people as you can with your genocidal dictator brush. If I was daft enough, I could do the same to you and Hitler, countless Inquisitors, terrorists, Joseph Coney, Idi Amin, boy-touching preachers etc etc etc but that would be absurd.

You're not the first one to draw people under your banners by attempting to use fear tactics.


and i'm sure many thought the same as you until they became victims of a pseudo philosophy that declares people as mere material things.

and i am not drawing anybody under any banners
projection much?

merely pointing out that what the OP is espousing is old nonsense
that's been gussied up and repackaged


and by the way, what exactly do think you are subverting if i may ask?
edit on 30-7-2012 by DerepentLEstranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
nor am i the one
promoting any agendas here


edit on 30-7-2012 by DerepentLEstranger because: DBL POST



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger
 


Thank you. I always wanted to see "gussied up" in a sentence. I don't think we use it enough, like "new fangled" and "high fallootin" ( I took a stab at spelling fallootin). When I was a kid, you could use queer in a sentence, it meant odd, you could be gay too. That meant being happy, light hearted. Then dag nabbit someone went and changed the meaning of those words without my say so! "Say, what's the big idea?" "A wise guy eh"....Moe, Larry, Curly, Joe and Shemp...gee I miss those guys.
edit on 30-7-2012 by HEYJOSE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

...and by the way, what exactly do think you are subverting if i may ask?


What do you got?



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
and i'm sure many thought the same as you until they became victims of a pseudo philosophy that declares people as mere material things.

and i am not drawing anybody under any banners projection much

merely pointing out that what the OP is espousing is old nonsense
that's been gussied up and repackaged


And you declare people are illusions.What's the difference?

You compared the OP and millions of others, including some of the greatest minds in this century and the last to Mao and Stalin. For some reason that doesn't seem right to me. Merely pointing something out? I doubt that.



and by the way, what exactly do think you are subverting if i may ask?


Of course you may ask. I don't think I'm subverting anything. It's a name. What exactly do you think you are derepenting?



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheJourney
You heard it right! I am sorry to disappoint all you spiritual people out there. Everything is physical! There is no such thing as transcendence of physicality. What we call spiritual existence, or higher planes of reality, are simply more complex, and more subtle, levels of physical reality.


Actually mate you got that entirely wrong. There is actually no physical reality in the world we live in. This is, and will be proven to be, an advanced quantum computer simulation of the past. And whilst we may appear as 3-dimensional beings living in an overlay of 4-dimensional time, we're actually just simulated holographic projections of a 2-dimensional plane.

And when you look at things that way, well basically, it more closely resembles a spiritual existence than it does a physical existence... And since our consciousness comes from Quantum bits, qbits, well they exist both in all states of dead, alive and both at the same time, meaning transcendence??? Transcendence to what? Maybe an "afterlife" program?

Peace out y0.
edit on 30-7-2012 by DaRAGE because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-7-2012 by DaRAGE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:34 PM
link   
how can something exist that does not physically exist?



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
I think the OP actually believes in a non-physical reality to the point of possibly being able to prove it scientifically in the future, but just has a different name for it.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
and i'm sure many thought the same as you until they became victims of a pseudo philosophy that declares people as mere material things.

and i am not drawing anybody under any banners projection much

merely pointing out that what the OP is espousing is old nonsense
that's been gussied up and repackaged


1-And you declare people are illusions.What's the difference?

2-....including some of the greatest minds in this century and the last to Mao and Stalin.




1-i have done no such thing
nor will you ever find a post of mine here stating such obvious twaddle.
fail

2- if you are talking about your positivist idols
that is merely your opinion
made worthless by the "fact" that your admiration is hardwired

oh look! what the "great minds are saying:


This, science's Ultimate Skepticism, has been spreading ever since then. Over the past two years even Darwinism, a sacred tenet among American scientists for the past seventy years, has been beset by...doubts. Scientists—not religiosi—notably the mathematician David Berlinski ("The Deniable Darwin," Commentary, June 1996) and the biochemist Michael Behe (Darwin's Black Box, 1996), have begun attacking Darwinism as a mere theory, not a scientific discovery, a theory woefully unsupported by fossil evidence and featuring, at the core of its logic, sheer mush. (Dennett and Dawkins, for whom Darwin is the Only Begotten, the Messiah, are already screaming. They're beside themselves, utterly apoplectic. Wilson, the giant, keeping his cool, has remained above the battle.) By 1990 the physicist Petr Beckmann of the University of Colorado had already begun going after Einstein. He greatly admired Einstein for his famous equation of matter and energy, E=mc2, but called his theory of relativity mostly absurd and grotesquely untestable. Beckmann died in 1993. His Fool Killer's cudgel has been taken up by Howard Hayden of the University of Connecticut, who has many admirers among the upcoming generation of Ultimately Skeptical young physicists. The scorn the new breed heaps upon quantum mechanics ("has no real–world applications"..."depends entirely on fairies sprinkling goofball equations in your eyes"), Unified Field Theory ("Nobel worm bait"), and the Big Bang Theory ("creationism for nerds") has become withering. If only Nietzsche were alive! He would have relished every minute of it!
www.orthodoxytoday.org...

PS: DerepentLEstranger = [french] suddenly, a stranger


edit on 30-7-2012 by DerepentLEstranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueMule

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

...and by the way, what exactly do think you are subverting if i may ask?


What do you got?

milk?


if you're going to be mysterious
please use the proper Sibylline forms



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by TheJourney
 


I agree with the overall idea, but I want to suggest that you don't base the whole of physical existence on the activity of particles. Particles are compositions of material existence, and while they are important as building blocks, they are not indivisible units of physical existence.

You're getting in the area code, but you have to break free of the material expression of physical existence to be able to approach the out-of-the-box thinking that will solve the mystery of the whole of what is existent. I'm encouraged though. It's not often that I see this kind of thinking here.




posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheJourney[/i

The acute reader will understand the implications, and will likely associate this with the law of attraction. That is correct, upon analysis you can see this as a working mechanism behind the law of attraction. Once we have established some of the implications of what I am saying, which may have at first seemed anti-spiritual and materialistic, I will have to now apologize to the materialist. What I am speaking of is, in a way, very strict materialism, but this mode of thought followed to its end leads to what has been called spiritual, though is not truly non-physical. What I am speaking of is physcal in the strict sense, relativistic, quantum, uncertain. An update to our understanding of what 'physical' actually means demonstrates no contradiction between the physical reality of materialists and the transcendental realities of the spiritualists.
edit on 30-7-2012 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-7-2012 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)


Actually you are not far from the truth....

Look into Quantum Loop Gravity....

Peace...

Korg.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   
It has nothing to do with particles, there are none, only waves. And yet consciousness is something beyond the school.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by TheJourney
 


My thoughts and ideas or physical or non-physical?. We can talk and argue about physical and non-physical realities but they come from the same place........"thoughts", "ideas", "concious" whatever you want to call it.
ummm... what im trying to say here is that you cant physically see my imagination, I have to explain it to you with words.

Like i said im not the best in forming advance grammar vocabulary sentences LOL but you seem like a smart guy and im sure that you understand my point..sort of..if not then atleast someone in this world does

edit on 30-7-2012 by BacknTime because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
why would it disappoint spiritual people that you use semantics to admit there are multiple physical layers of reality? non-ordinary reality is also a differing layer of physicality you say, so radio waves are physical and quatum mechanis suggests hyper physical characteristics...a black hole is physical. ...just semantics. in a multiple dimensional universe you define all dimensions as physical. just another way of talking about non-physical reality using physical matter verbal symantics to talk about what spiritual people refer to as dimensionality outside our perception, experience, or co-presence. its a waste of time. if you admit quatum reality, the term 'physical' is passe.. fail.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 08:41 PM
link   
I have only read the OP....But I would like to comment.

Haven't you forgotten about consciousness? What is our consciousness, if it is only physical? Where does thought come from? How can our minds learn and grow in intelligence, if there is only the physical? This just does not make sense. What are our auras? What is that feeling between your hands when you close your eyes, put your palms facing each other, 4 inches apart, and just focusing on them? The physical is only a small part of our reality. When we can astral project and travel anywhere we wish, and experience the divine, we know, through intuition that the physical is not all there is. By the way, what is intuition, or the akashic records? How can those exist in the physical world?



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 08:42 PM
link   
there are many things beyond your meagre grasp upon reality .... in limiting your thinking you limit yourself .... english far too limited a language to fully explain concepts /ideas in ...



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

oh look! what the "great minds are saying:


This, science's Ultimate Skepticism, has been spreading ever since then. Over the past two years even Darwinism, a sacred tenet among American scientists for the past seventy years, has been beset by...doubts. Scientists—not religiosi—notably the mathematician David Berlinski ("The Deniable Darwin," Commentary, June 1996) and the biochemist Michael Behe (Darwin's Black Box, 1996), have begun attacking Darwinism as a mere theory, not a scientific discovery, a theory woefully unsupported by fossil evidence and featuring, at the core of its logic, sheer mush. (Dennett and Dawkins, for whom Darwin is the Only Begotten, the Messiah, are already screaming. They're beside themselves, utterly apoplectic. Wilson, the giant, keeping his cool, has remained above the battle.) By 1990 the physicist Petr Beckmann of the University of Colorado had already begun going after Einstein. He greatly admired Einstein for his famous equation of matter and energy, E=mc2, but called his theory of relativity mostly absurd and grotesquely untestable. Beckmann died in 1993. His Fool Killer's cudgel has been taken up by Howard Hayden of the University of Connecticut, who has many admirers among the upcoming generation of Ultimately Skeptical young physicists. The scorn the new breed heaps upon quantum mechanics ("has no real–world applications"..."depends entirely on fairies sprinkling goofball equations in your eyes"), Unified Field Theory ("Nobel worm bait"), and the Big Bang Theory ("creationism for nerds") has become withering. If only Nietzsche were alive! He would have relished every minute of it!
www.orthodoxytoday.org...

PS: DerepentLEstranger = [french] suddenly, a stranger


edit on 30-7-2012 by DerepentLEstranger because: (no reason given)


I'm sorry that I assumed you were an idealist with a bone to pick with materialists. I was wrong. And I want to also apologize for my attitude towards your post. I have a problem with over generalizations, as that's a sure way to dehumanize and devalue humanity, which you are a part of.

And yes, that's the second time you've posted your moral memoirs. What a display of one's wounds. If you fear science so much, go all out and stop using the computer, stop typing to people on the internet. Or does your morals only extend to what suits you?

Before we lapse into some battle over the morality of science, let's hear an argument that may refute the OPs post, and I will reply in kind and with the utmost respect. If moral vanity is all you seek, we shall leave it at that.










posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
I don't know that the exercise of critical thought, such as being remarkably displayed in this thread, could ever be considered useless or futile. "Semantics" as we snidely use the word, I find is incorrectly used. Semantics is suppose to be illustrative of the imperfect nature of language and the subscribed meanings we give language. Don't get me wrong, I'm as guilty as any other in debate, using semantics as my defense when faced with particularly difficult concepts. In this light, quantum psychology is very important when approaching the hard sciences such as physics and biology for example. However, I'm not convinced we should approach the liberal arts, such as philosophy or the metaphysical, in the same way.

In crying semantics - this will not stop the nature of who we are and I think we are explorers, inventors, and creators of highly complex ideas and thoughts. It is natural to question our existence, our role within that existence, and the very nature of it. In fact it is imperative, as our humanity is best served in looking for deeper meanings to life.

Eh, if that makes any sense. My head is starting to hurt!




new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join