Lest we forget

[TomOfSweden]

Well, after your other post about being worried about how you come across, I must admit, I was looking forward to seeing your response here . Anyway, the problem is that I can't really counter your arguments as a scientist, which is making me feel really stupid. I want to be very clear on my wording on that, because I most certainly do NOT mean that you are making me feel stupid.

Good. I don't want you to feel stupid. My goal is to understand you by testing your arguments. With any luck we'll both learn something

The basic misunderstanding or difficulty lies here:

"Aren't you mixing up human interpretation of the world with the actual physical state? I live in a different plane of reality then, let's say somebody colourblind. But both of us can understand the physical properties of colours just as well. The goal of the scientiffic language is to minimize the room for interpretation, (hence all the boring maths). I'm sure that with enough shrooms I can see god, that will never be any proof for gods existance. We all know that our senses aren't particularly fine tuned. So we can't really trust them. You do agree on that one, right?"

No. I'm not mixing up physical reality with personal interpretation. I'm saying that personal interpretation reveals or creates another reality that is equal to physical reality. And as far as trusting senses, we really only have a few sources of information:

1. our senses
2. our logic
3. other people/hearsay, which is filtered through 1 & 2.

Logic cannot create data, therefore ALL our data about the world comes, in some way, from our senses. There was apparently an experiment done in which they somehow proved that if no one was looking, a single particle of light could be in two places at once, but if someone was looking, it was where they expected it to be. Again, I have no way of knowing if this was true, but it's really interesting to me. This is sort of what I believed before I heard about the experiment anyway. For example: love. How do you know you love someone? It feels a certain way to you, physically and emotionally, but how do you describe that to someone who's never felt love before? How do you convince them that it exists, at least for you? I'm not trying to tell you you should believe in something spiritual or supernatural. I'm trying to explain why I do. For me, the feeling is as great as the feeling of love, and yet it's different. It's like submission, but it's different than that, too. When I do magic, it's like being dominant, but different. It's not something I can easily explain, since it's well, like an emotion. It's the same sort of feeling as reading something really well-written and feeling your skin shiver at how -right- it is. Not necessarily nice, but -right-.

This is a bit confusing. No, you can't explain love to somebody who hasn't felt it before. You, (or me) have no idea if the way you experience love is the same as for other people. So far I'm all with you with seperate realities. This is all pretty basic stuff which I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who doesn't agree with. But then you go into particle of light being at different places depending on who looks. Light is energy. Energy behaves the way energy does. No mind control in the world can change that. You do agree with that one right? physics

Now, as for the moral code -- there are a couple of problems here:

1. You seem to have an assumption that in any relationship between the supernatural and the natural that the supernatural must always be right, or that the supernatural is somehow separate from the natural or that the supernatural is way more powerful than the natural and thus you end up in a Might makes Right situation. I don't believe that at all, so your three possibilities don't really make sense to me. What I really believe is that I am God, and everything exists within me, and at the same time, I'm not God, and everything exists outside of me. Everything is God. And Nothing is God. Everything else we "call" God is just faces that make sense to us as individuals. But I don't think that God, in this sense, has any desire other than to learn more. I think we are souls in bodies because bodies do allow us to experience things through our senses, which are less accurate, but deeper and more "real" than the view God would have. Which is another tangent from the discussion about why I believe what I do and whether the existence of the supernatural means it's either irrelevant or defaultly demanding blind obedience. Again, if there's a supernatural "moral code", it would be to experience things through our senses, and really, I think it's true that we can't really escape that too easily or for very long, without having major nerve damage. So, I guess we are in agreement on that one.

Ok, so you're a pantheist. ie we are god. So where does the supernatural come into the picture? It doesn't sound like you believe in the supernatural at all. You sound like more like an atheist in denial.