It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
1 the quality of dealing with ideas rather than events: topics will vary in degrees of abstraction.
• something that exists only as an idea: the question can no longer be treated as an academic abstraction.
Much more fulfilling than abstract objects and ideas? Absolutely; but only because they are capable of fulfilling, being tangible, substantiated and real. Your spiritual abstractions? They are about as fulfilling as other things that don't exist outside of dreams. The harder you clutch onto and strive for things that don't exist, the more difficult it is to be fulfilled in any way, unless you begin to believe your own ignorance.
Would you say thought is an abstraction?
I would say that words are an abstraction from the real thing but thought does happen, thought is experienced.
Originally posted by Angle
What would having God in your mind make of yourself?
It would seperate you from others. You would differ in a wrong way from other people, yet it would be no problem at all. But spirit God doesn't allow this to be. No shortcuts to the cause of all things. They aren't needed, for you must be what God is.
Is it impossible to have God in your mind?
I suppose so, yes. Your mind is for different things.
Is it an ilness 'having God in your mind'?
I think so. It makes you any effect anymore of the cause of all things.
I understand that you are speaking practically, which has always been your strong suit - however, I would argue to the extent that learning to appreciate abstractions makes it easier to come to a middle point where you can understand the practicality of materialism and the security of idealism. Ideas give us the strength to carry on, whereas materialism gives us the reward.
Abstraction is only as useful as what you make of it. If it isn't worth much to you, you don't take advantage of it a whole lot.
What I was replying to was your remark about materialistic dogma being shallow. I would say the opposite is the case. But I agree with your points on the psychology of these world views.
It is shallow. More work for less gratification. Idealism is far more malleable, more flexible for the earnest visionary. Replicate those rewarding sensations through psychological pursuit, and no more thankless materialistic struggles.
Of course, some people find physicality much easier than cognition. I don't have an answer for them, but that's okay...chances are, they already have one. It doesn't take much to make them happy.
Nonetheless, idealism is like multiplying zeros with more zeros. If the pursuit of nothings makes one happy, I suppose there is nothing wrong with that.
I hope that was a clearer message. Like I said, you have a very good point, but sometimes, materialism distracts us from the things that leave the biggest mark. A new bicycle is all well and good, but what you remember most is your parents teaching you how to ride.
So I agree with everything you say, except I think you're more promoting a physicalist view.
Very few people seriously consider that God and angels are, almost by definition, ET. We have so many preconditioned concepts that merely using one term and not the other seems to erect a blast wall through which a common ground is impossible.
I gotta say, ET's are geniuses compared to that old fart. I wouldn't insult them by implying any similarity between Zeus and Paul (the alien who adventured with Simon Pegg and Nick Frost - please, keep up with your cinematic education).edit on 5-3-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)
Which old fart? The Jewish/ Christian deity? Why does it always default back to Him? If ET's are a higher intelligence, (which they would have to be considering they got here and we can't get there), then that begs the question, who created them?