Spirit Science; a full movie

Rather than have such a one-sided view, but to still allow the OP to have his choir to preach to, I will offer my opinion on the video.

Any philosophical dissertation, whether in books or on YouTube, should at least provide some arguments if it wishes to be taken seriously. In this video, there are very few rational arguments. It's merely telling you what to think.

Secondly, anyone who derives their own philosophies from the philosophies of others, especially from a youtube video, is very suspect in my opinion.

Thanks for allowing me an opinion.

Originally posted by Theophorus
how did you come to this understanding that the self has the nature of an illusion? what research led you to this? please give a example.

I mean as in defining the "self" as a separate entity to anything else. You need food, water, air, sunlight and so on to survive, on a planet that depends on space to be where it is, etc, etc. You're also constantly changing in different ways, so who and what you are is always in a state of flux, there's no solid and unchanging "self" that you can point to. So in several ways it's like an illusion.

so your saying that God, Jesus, Buddha, Allah can be found in ...lets say, Rocks? how about water? what about trees? my dog?

If you go down to the quantum level or further, maybe there's no real difference.

duality? how can one remove the duality or obscuration in a rock? or water? or a tree?

I was meaning more in our minds as humans than I was rocks, water or trees!

isnt "were all part of the same thing" a concept? why would you want to remove the concept of God and Man?

If you rely on and attach to concepts it might be a lot harder to see reality as it's supposed to be.

Usually feelings are describe as not being described though words.Feelings are nothing but unreasoned opinions.

Words are words, and can only point as closely as possible, not fully allow someone to understand the truth. (this is also for the poster who mentioned Pantheism too.)

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne
Rather than have such a one-sided view, but to still allow the OP to have his choir to preach to, I will offer my opinion on the video.

Any philosophical dissertation, whether in books or on YouTube, should at least provide some arguments if it wishes to be taken seriously. In this video, there are very few rational arguments. It's merely telling you what to think.

Secondly, anyone who derives their own philosophies from the philosophies of others, especially from a youtube video, is very suspect in my opinion.

Thanks for allowing me an opinion.

Your opinion is free as a bird my friend

No one is telling you how or what to think, you can only shape your own mind by choosing to accept ideas or other philosophies other then your own. Noone can ever force you to think a certain way, its based on your own perception. So argue rationally all you want sir.

Secondly, it doesnt matter if you take things from youtube. We live in a new age of technology, electronics is the main communcation globally and that is not going to change. This allows someone from China to have conferences to others in America.. a video on the internet is just a way to get your meaning, message, teachings, business, education, entertainment or social means across via long distance-- wether it be video, MP3, instant messaging, forums, chatrooms or whatever form of internet communication.

Judging others by being suspect is not going to make you much friends in life I believe. The internet is the prime way for long distance communication. Its an everyday tool, phones now have instant internet access. So your statement is meaningless.

If you dont agree with the video, just simply say you dont agree with the video. No need to judge others who take this knowledge and apply it to their own believes and views on Life itself. Its fun when everyone is different right?

reply to post by robhines


I understand what you were/are saying, and I totally agree with you

~ Love is an art

reply to post by robhines

I mean as in defining the "self" as a separate entity to anything else. You need food, water, air, sunlight and so on to survive, on a planet that depends on space to be where it is, etc, etc. You're also constantly changing in different ways, so who and what you are is always in a state of flux, there's no solid and unchanging "self" that you can point to. So in several ways it's like an illusion.

so in other words what you are saying is, that which can only be real is that which is constent. unchanging . is this correct?

reply to post by Theophorus


All that's real is inside your head. The fact that chemicals, both ingested and produced by the mind, can change what you see and how you feel...that proves it.

That's putting it simply. It goes so much, much deeper than that...vibrations and energy patterns and all that good stuff. But maybe I'm imagining it; it is inside my head, you know. And how can we really be sure we're not imagining everything?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Theophorus

 

All that's real is inside your head. The fact that chemicals, both ingested and produced by the mind, can change what you see and how you feel...that proves it.

That's putting it simply. It goes so much, much deeper than that...vibrations and energy patterns and all that good stuff. But maybe I'm imagining it; it is inside my head, you know. And how can we really be sure we're not imagining everything?

edit on 8-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

I was unaware that the mind can ingest and produce chemicals that can alter how you feel and see. Regardless, us as humans have the ability to reason. Feelings, or what you feel, are nothing more than unreasoned opinions. If you take everything you see at face value,with out reasoning, your judgement would be incorrect. you have not proved anything. its only through your ability to reason can you determine if something is an illusion or not.

Originally posted by LoveisanArt

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne
Secondly, anyone who derives their own philosophies from the philosophies of others, especially from a youtube video, is very suspect in my opinion.

Secondly, it doesnt matter if you take things from youtube. We live in a new age of technology, electronics is the main communcation globally and that is not going to change. This allows someone from China to have conferences to others in America.. a video on the internet is just a way to get your meaning, message, teachings, business, education, entertainment or social means across via long distance-- wether it be video, MP3, instant messaging, forums, chatrooms or whatever form of internet communication.

I have a problem with it, as well, but it's more of an abstract matter that I'm not really sure I've solidified yet.

Someone posted another video, of the guy from Winnipeg who made the cartoon, but this was just him, and I watched it. The biggest thing that struck me was his... manic nature. Hand waving, talking really fast, skipping from subject to subject, not seeming to understand some basic concepts, but, whatever. He's twenty years old, excited about the subject matter, and it's just a Youtube video, so whatever.

But then, about halfway through, he posts another guy's video, a Jason Silva, and he was exactly the same way -- manic. That, more than what they were talking about, intrigued me, so I went out to look at who this Silva guy was, and whether behaving like you'd taken too much Adderall was just some new method of communication, and what I saw was where my disconnect is.

I found a bunch of videos by this guy, and apparently his claim to fame is that he's a "futurist, a visionary thinker, who creates mind blowing videos that show us a glimpse of our future". But the problem is that he's none of that (well, he does make videos) -- he takes the ideas of others and makes videos that shoot ideas at you so quickly that you don't even know what the heck they are, much less have the ability to think about, determine if they're valid or not, or even where they're coming from. They overwhelm the viewer, and for a non-critical thinker, they are, indeed, likely masterpieces of mind blowing goodness, because it's like being shot in the face by a shotgun loaded with "idea shells".

Do I believe that this guy understands what he's talking about? No, not really, because he's not formulating new ideas, he's just sucking in everything around him like a Hoover and then projectile vomiting it out at his audience. Who, apparently, includes the guy in Winnipeg, who draws the cartoons of what are now three person removed ideas, and presents them to his audience.

I'm not a big fan of Ray Kurzweil's, but for the love of pete, the man has written books... go read one and think about it!

Like I said, I'm not really sure that I've fully sorted out the problems that I have with this medium, but there's some disconnect when someone who simply aggregates the ideas of others, packages them up in a very manipulative video and posts it online is praised as a genius who "sees the future."

Sample Jason Silva video

reply to post by Theophorus

I was unaware that the mind can ingest and produce chemicals that can alter how you feel and see.

Ever heard of drugs? Both the legal and the illegal kind. That's why we take them, to alter both the way we see the world and how we react to it.

Regardless, us as humans have the ability to reason.

You assume that we want to. If the reality, the truth, is horrifying enough, we will choose to close it out and create our own version of reality. It's one of our greatest gifts. You see it all the time in crime cases.

If you take everything you see at face value,with out reasoning, your judgement would be incorrect.

There are very few true absolutes in life, and that is not one of them.

its only through your ability to reason can you determine if something is an illusion or not.

We must choose to accept the results of that reasoning, however. If we decide the truth is not worth the pain it brings, guess what happens? We close it out. We choose our own truth. And that doesn't even begin to touch on how perception can change the truth in the eyes of different people. If a box that has a white side, a blue side, a red side, a yellow side, a green side, and a black side is seen only from the red side, does that mean the entire box is red? We often think so, because we don't see the other sides and so we think that's all there is.

When you have seen everything there is to see in life, that is when you can say you KNOW what's real and what isn't. Until then, all you have is belief. Because that's all perception gives us.

Originally posted by Theophorus
so in other words what you are saying is, that which can only be real is that which is constent. unchanging . is this correct?

In a sense, yeah.

(Again I removed some of what I wrote, because sometimes the more you try to explain with this subject the more problems it can bring up with concepts, words, ideas, language and so on.)

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by LoveisanArt

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne
Secondly, anyone who derives their own philosophies from the philosophies of others, especially from a youtube video, is very suspect in my opinion.

Secondly, it doesnt matter if you take things from youtube. We live in a new age of technology, electronics is the main communcation globally and that is not going to change. This allows someone from China to have conferences to others in America.. a video on the internet is just a way to get your meaning, message, teachings, business, education, entertainment or social means across via long distance-- wether it be video, MP3, instant messaging, forums, chatrooms or whatever form of internet communication.

I have a problem with it, as well, but it's more of an abstract matter that I'm not really sure I've solidified yet.

Someone posted another video, of the guy from Winnipeg who made the cartoon, but this was just him, and I watched it. The biggest thing that struck me was his... manic nature. Hand waving, talking really fast, skipping from subject to subject, not seeming to understand some basic concepts, but, whatever. He's twenty years old, excited about the subject matter, and it's just a Youtube video, so whatever.

But then, about halfway through, he posts another guy's video, a Jason Silva, and he was exactly the same way -- manic. That, more than what they were talking about, intrigued me, so I went out to look at who this Silva guy was, and whether behaving like you'd taken too much Adderall was just some new method of communication, and what I saw was where my disconnect is.

I found a bunch of videos by this guy, and apparently his claim to fame is that he's a "futurist, a visionary thinker, who creates mind blowing videos that show us a glimpse of our future". But the problem is that he's none of that (well, he does make videos) -- he takes the ideas of others and makes videos that shoot ideas at you so quickly that you don't even know what the heck they are, much less have the ability to think about, determine if they're valid or not, or even where they're coming from. They overwhelm the viewer, and for a non-critical thinker, they are, indeed, likely masterpieces of mind blowing goodness, because it's like being shot in the face by a shotgun loaded with "idea shells".

Do I believe that this guy understands what he's talking about? No, not really, because he's not formulating new ideas, he's just sucking in everything around him like a Hoover and then projectile vomiting it out at his audience. Who, apparently, includes the guy in Winnipeg, who draws the cartoons of what are now three person removed ideas, and presents them to his audience.

I'm not a big fan of Ray Kurzweil's, but for the love of pete, the man has written books... go read one and think about it!

Like I said, I'm not really sure that I've fully sorted out the problems that I have with this medium, but there's some disconnect when someone who simply aggregates the ideas of others, packages them up in a very manipulative video and posts it online is praised as a genius who "sees the future."

Sample Jason Silva video

I feel the same way. Great insight.

These videos are second-hand opinions made by people who may or may not have any credibility. It's difficult to take their word as their own or that of someone else. And like you said, the presentation is so erratic and moves so quickly that here is no time to think about what was just discussed. There's also no room for fact-checking, citations or evidence, only assertions and claims, which usually are designed to sound seductive or romantic. Such presentation removes attention from the content to the one presenting the content—which may or may not be the underlying intent behind their videos.

Do I believe that this guy understands what he's talking about? No, not really, because he's not formulating new ideas, he's just sucking in everything around him like a Hoover and then projectile vomiting it out at his audience.

This is the best line I've read on ATS in quite some time. I'm glad there are still people who can see things for what they are.

reply to post by adjensen


My friend... I understand what your saying. You think I take everything on the internet to the heart and mind? Lol.. your more lost then Jason Silva if that is your assumption.

People have high volumes of energy, there is nothing wrong with it. They are connected to nature, they feed off the bio energy of the planet. Emotions run high, feelings are peaking, of course these kids will be acting all silly and what not. They are having fun, and at least they are not being judgmental and negative seeing black and white.

There is no true way to live on this life. Everything we know and understand is based on the thoughts that run through our heads and the emotions that rise or decend in our hearts. These two things create what we percieve as reality. Both of these things are influenced by eachother, which can be influenced by the outside World.

Someone chooses to follow a thought or belief within them, maybe that certain thought-based-belief gives them a nice emotion? That is no crime, you dont agree with it, dont worry about it. It shouldnt be affecting you anyways. And if it is.. maybe you need to put more attention in yourself then what you think of other people and how they make videos and what not..

Not everything you see, hear or think over the internet will be truthfully-genuine. But if it resonates with you and makes you feel good inside, then that is all that matters. We are no Gods to be judging eachother on thought-based beleifs.

A christian is a christian because he resonates with what is in the Bible, the thoughts that have manifested from the ideas within that book, ring true to that individual. A buddust is a buddist because buddism and constant meditation has resonated and made sense within that individuals mental body - thoughts. The resonation brings a feeling of truthfullness within, so one is a buddist. An athiest is an athiest because they choose to pick thoughts that disect everything and try to make sense of anything. If it doesnt make sense, it doesnt resonate, thus, one is an athiest.

Everything we are and belief, manifested from thought form, and an emotional (or no emotion) base. There is no need to judge others who you perceive weird or different, or even "lost".. these people hold different thought-patterns and emotional feelings then you, and that is just fine.

My desktop background has a nice big picture of the Buddha with my favorite quote;

~ All that we are, is a result of all we have thought ~ The Buddha

I am not a buddist though I am an individual being (person in your thought-terms) seeking spiritual development, meanwhile making the best of my physical reality as I can while Im 'Down-here' on Earth. I do not belong to any religion, and do not put myself under any catagory. And thats the way I like it

Thank you for your input puppy dog

Peace and love

reply to post by LoveisanArt


I am the space that allows existence to appear to exist.
I am not the thoughts that arise, i am the knower of thought.

I didn't watch the movie in the Op, but I watched this other Spirit Science movie ( made by the same people) www.youtube.com...

I found it to be very poorly done. The references they give are just name drops with no details on what those people did to arrive at the conclusions they use in the film - or no way to know if the film makers are taking those peoples work out of context. This film seems to string a lot of ideas together very fast giving you nothing to properly digest to help you formulate an opinion as to if this can be true or not. Very many things in this film contradicts itself time and time again. Much of the ideas in the film are based on speculation and imaginings, not even written evidence from ancient sources.

I'd say this whole movement is an outright hoax to further someones agenda. It presents itself that way.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


The video is literally ripped from other books that the maker of the video (Jordan I suppose his name is?) has read himself. I read such books a couple years ago so I am a bit familular with the information presented in the video. Do some research on Drunvalo Melchizdek (crazy name for sure), he had channelings from a being named Thoth, this is where he gets his knowledge and work from.

The video has not taken anything out of context; just presents it in a way people un familular with the knowledge can understand easier. Like a "beginners" teachings. The truth of the knowledge is up to the indiviudal viewer

As I was reading along in this thread, it got me thinking... all the arguments that Jordan (and the guys who wrote the books he is basing his videos off of) doesn't present any evidence to support his beliefs means that he is a hoax/crackpot/liar/etc... don't millions of people mindlessly follow the bible which basically is stating "facts" with no evidence whatsoever as well? It just strikes me as funny that someone can throw out those allegations against one belief system while blindly following another that is basically doing the same thing.

With that said, I want to thank everyone who non-argumentatively presented their thoughts. I especially appreciated this:

A christian is a christian because he resonates with what is in the Bible, the thoughts that have manifested from the ideas within that book, ring true to that individual. A buddust is a buddist because buddism and constant meditation has resonated and made sense within that individuals mental body - thoughts. The resonation brings a feeling of truthfullness within, so one is a buddist. An athiest is an athiest because they choose to pick thoughts that disect everything and try to make sense of anything. If it doesnt make sense, it doesnt resonate, thus, one is an athiest.

Namaste

reply to post by samara11278


No evidence? Did you even watch the video? All he presented was mathematical evidence and cross-referencing to show that it comes from all sorts of ancient history.

No evidence? That's bologne.

Originally posted by samara11278
As I was reading along in this thread, it got me thinking... all the arguments that Jordan (and the guys who wrote the books he is basing his videos off of) doesn't present any evidence to support his beliefs means that he is a hoax/crackpot/liar/etc... don't millions of people mindlessly follow the bible which basically is stating "facts" with no evidence whatsoever as well? It just strikes me as funny that someone can throw out those allegations against one belief system while blindly following another that is basically doing the same thing.

With that said, I want to thank everyone who non-argumentatively presented their thoughts.

I especially appreciated this:

A christian is a christian because he resonates with what is in the Bible, the thoughts that have manifested from the ideas within that book, ring true to that individual. A buddust is a buddist because buddism and constant meditation has resonated and made sense within that individuals mental body - thoughts. The resonation brings a feeling of truthfullness within, so one is a buddist. An athiest is an athiest because they choose to pick thoughts that disect everything and try to make sense of anything. If it doesnt make sense, it doesnt resonate, thus, one is an athiest.

Namaste

Originally posted by LoveisanArt
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

 

The video is literally ripped from other books that the maker of the video (Jordan I suppose his name is?) has read himself. I read such books a couple years ago so I am a bit familular with the information presented in the video. Do some research on Drunvalo Melchizdek (crazy name for sure), he had channelings from a being named Thoth, this is where he gets his knowledge and work from.

The video has not taken anything out of context; just presents it in a way people un familular with the knowledge can understand easier. Like a "beginners" teachings. The truth of the knowledge is up to the indiviudal viewer

Channelings huh? It's one thing to say we have these ancient texts that may or may not present a true alternative view of history depending on translation and interpretation - That, at least is able to be examined - but it's quite another to expect to be believable something that some guy just pulled out of thin air. There is no way to corroborate any of this then as it could all be made up. The Sumerian histories do make at least a logical linear sense - I find that same sense lacking in the above mentioned video. Is anything this fellow or his ghost spirit Thorth says backed up by any real historical evidence? What about corroboration from science itself? You know.. he gives a lot of stuff away that can either be backed up or debunked by science.

This reminds me of Jane Roberts channeling of Seth.

Originally posted by robhines

Originally posted by Theophorus
so in other words what you are saying is, that which can only be real is that which is constent. unchanging . is this correct?

In a sense, yeah.

(Again I removed some of what I wrote, because sometimes the more you try to explain with this subject the more problems it can bring up with concepts, words, ideas, language and so on.)

edit on 9-9-2012 by robhines because: shortened

im gonna go ahead and totally agree with you 100 % . That which can only be real is that which is constent. UNCHANGING. Here is where christian and buddhism differ. Christians believe that change is constent. And that is unchanging. The act of creation alone is change. Buddhists believe that god does not change and is real , the universe is an illusion. Reason tells us that everything and god change is the constent and never changes. Real.