Page 5 of 10 « First<34567>Last »
Topic Options
#30095 - 09/27/09 05:24 AM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Caladrius Offline
member


Registered: 07/25/09
Posts: 320
Loc: SoCal
"He was a scientist. He worked in science, not myth." Maw

I'll dumb something else down for you so we can be on the "level."
I don't know what you mean when you use the word Mythos-Myth. But when I use it I essentially mean "story telling." That's as dumb as I can get.

When I say that Einstein was using "mythos" to acquire his theory of relativity shit, I mean the mutherfucker was using his fucking imagination and telling stories... stories which only later became ACCEPTED as reasonable.
_________________________
Chloe 352

Top
#30096 - 09/27/09 05:30 AM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: Caladrius]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3151
To answer just plain simply on this discussion:
A lack of logos creates mythos, mythos thrives into the brains of the ones without insight or knowledge while being adapted underway to "fit" the human experiences, observations and mistakes.
Only afterwards critical thinkers will begin to dissect the mythos and expand the logos.


 Quote:
This is unscientific. To reject a theory and to condemn and "excommunicate" it's theorist for conceiving an idea which contradicts established scientific dogma based on written shit by Newton and Einstein et al.

If a theory is being rejected, it most of the times means that there is something wrong with it.
I would like to remind you that there is no such thing as "scientifique dogma". Someone believing such a thing or trying to critize the pure scientifique way is a pseudo-scientist or an idiot without a clue.

Science is based on observations, repeatable experiments, models and logic. If you search a bit on the internet you'll notice and will find books, articles and lectures with critics pro and contra for any subject you have in mind. Perhaps you should search a bit more about "electric universe critics".. sometimes opening up the eyecaps might do wonders.

 Quote:

You support science and reason, which is great, but do you understand the state of that which you are supporting? Or is the "science" you are supporting the shit you came across in text books, classrooms, and wiki?

Science has no state, it is happy with all possible views on a subject. Yet there is only one condition: it has to make sense.. and clearly most things spit out by so-called "scientists" (read pseudo-scientists) simply aren't, lack a fundamental model and simply come up with bullshit. Sadly enough most idiots fall for the empty posturing done by these leeches.
It is ofcourse not their mistake, not everyone is gifted with a good working brain and the ability to have a broad perspective while remaining critical.

And while some say you give some interesting points I stick to my first reply..
Especially if a person can't build up a coherent sentence without the words "shit, fuck, fucking,..".


Edited by Dimitri (09/27/09 06:17 AM)
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#30097 - 09/27/09 06:09 AM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
"Esse est percipi"

Of course I am equating perception of reality with reality Maw, they are identical. Everyone has their own reality but this does not conclude all are isolated. We just coexist in overlapping parts and that is why you still can have that rocket car.

Descriptive laws are tools which work in a certain context but are not necessarily true for all. They can be true in my reality and how I perceive others reality (which is of course a no-brainer to me) but it doesn't necessarily work the other way around. Think the theory of evolution as an example.

D.

Top
#30099 - 09/27/09 06:26 AM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I really don't understand what the confusion here is about the relation of Mythos-Logos as explained in the first post and why all so vehemently react to it? There seems to be some confusion and it is almost interpreted as abandoning all we know and start following some mythological story to the letter.

Maybe if I quote Einstein the relation will be more obvious.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand."
-Albert Einstein

I got his letters which might share more views upon it but I'm in the middle of a move and it'll have to wait until I got all books back into place.

D.

Top
#30102 - 09/27/09 11:42 AM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3935
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Originally Posted By: Caladrius

When I say that Einstein was using "mythos" to acquire his theory of relativity shit, I mean the mutherfucker was using his fucking imagination and telling stories... stories which only later became ACCEPTED as reasonable.

This little gem here seems to sum up your whole case, and also illustrates why it fails.

If you could produce some sort of evidence that Einstein, or anyone else, has the ability to somehow (perhaps through alchemy?) transform his or her fanciful wishes into reality, you would indeed have accomplished something.

Alas, though, it has become obvious that it is in fact your critical misunderstanding of how science, and scientific discoveries work that is impeding your understanding.

Since you seem to be fond of patronizing tones and looking down your nose at those that disagree with you, let me 'dumb this down to YOUR level' a second. Scientists to not 'create', they 'uncover'. Einstein did not 'dream up' his theories, he figured out theories that fit testable reality.

You see, that's what science does, what it is. Science is simply knowledge, and all methods of reliably acquiring it. If you think a particular accepted theory or idea is bullshit, you have to do BETTER science, come up with BETTER explanations, and they better be testable and repeatable!

If they aren't, you are left with the 'mythos' you seem to be so fond of, which is fine. Just don't pretend it contains any real explanatory power here in the real world.

After all, if it did it would be logos, not mythos, now wouldn't it ? \:\)
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#30103 - 09/27/09 11:57 AM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: Dan_Dread]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3935
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo

Of course I am equating perception of reality with reality Maw, they are identical. Everyone has their own reality but this does not conclude all are isolated. We just coexist in overlapping parts and that is why you still can have that rocket car.

I disagree. I think reality is as it is, regardless of how anyone or anything perceives it. We can't create our own reality. We are all bound by the same laws laid out for us by 'the universe'.

We of course are just crude flesh contraptions with randomly and highly inefficiently evolved senses with which to experience this reality, and a fairly primitive fleshly brain with which to interpret this data. With this said, we probably don't experience this reality as it really IS, or even have the faculties to understand how or what REALITY really is.

All we can really do is work with what we have to try to get as close to 'the real' as we can. To stretch the limits of our understanding and ability to try to uncover what we can, and use it to our best benefit. This is a hard and mostly unrewarding path, but still far superior to embracing mythology and make believe to fill in the blanks. Results gathered in this fashion will get nobody closer to any sort of real truth.

Of course, if you like it in LALA land and don't care about what objective reality has to offer, that is fine. Many people, probably most, live with one foot firmly planted in fantasy. Just don't mistake one foot for the other.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#30106 - 09/27/09 12:46 PM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: Dan_Dread]
Caladrius Offline
member


Registered: 07/25/09
Posts: 320
Loc: SoCal
What exactly do we each mean when we use the word "reality?" Do we mean the stuff floating out there like planets and stars and nebulas? Do we mean a weltanschauung? Or is it something hazy in between? Is it what our Mind puts together as the environment it exists in as an observer? The minute the objective stimulae of the outside world is beheld by our minds and comes into our conscious awareness, it has become a subjective phenomenon. By that I mean to say that what we "see" as being the outside world is actually the by-product of the electrical jiggles and wiggles of our brain. Once it is in the brain/mind it is subjective.

If by "reality" was mean to say the environment our mind/brain exists "within" as an observer. Then yes, we do constantly change and mutate our reality. In fact one man or corporation can alter the reality of the whole world.

To illustrate: the invention of Commercial airlines or Computers or television or Bill Gates or automobiles or the concept of personal liberty and freedom or the big changer of reality: Money. Granted, these things don't force Jupiter into new orbits and shit, but they have each changes, revolutionized our "world" we live in: the "reality" which our minds are directly exposed to and immersed "in."
_________________________
Chloe 352

Top
#30119 - 09/27/09 05:53 PM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: Caladrius]
Caladrius Offline
member


Registered: 07/25/09
Posts: 320
Loc: SoCal
[oops, I mean "Physical" not "psychical" I was thinking of something different, in the other thread.]

Edited by Caladrius (09/27/09 05:55 PM)
_________________________
Chloe 352

Top
#30125 - 09/28/09 08:01 AM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: Caladrius]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
We are not talking about reality itself but about reality as perceived by a human and the limitations and potential which come with that.

When for a second attributing consciousness to an object, imagine a video camera to be a conscious observer. The reality as the video camera perceives it is two dimensional; it does not see depth. The lens perceives the environment, processes that through its processor (brain) and puts it on film. Reality for that camera is limited to the width of its lens and to the dimensions of its film. The fact that reality is three-dimensional and existing outside of the lens range is an alien concept to the camera. Its subjective reality is as 'big' as the camera's limitations.

The same goes for conscious life forms on earth. The size of the reality of a life form is equally great as the potential of its consciousness. A cat has a small reality compared to that of a human. Why is our reality so huge? Because our consciousness has one magnificent ability seldom encountered in other life forms here; imagination. But even our expanded consciousness does have one severe limitation; it can't perceive reality different than it perceives it. Just like the camera has its limitations, so have we humans. And that's why we are stuck inside a subjective reality.

This however does not imply that all exists in our brain, or that whatever we imagine becomes necessarily true. But it creates potential to toy with reality. As mentioned before, the psychodrama of Satanism can be taken outside of its box and spread through reality. If this sounds alien, imagine a depressed person. What they do (even if unwillingly) is nothing else but take their internal psychodrama and use it to change reality (as perceived by them). Belief does the same. It doesn't matter if people believe in god, ghosts, the devil or demons, the process is identical; they change their reality to include what they believe and reality will, in return, affirm them in their belief. The fact that about all satanists think they are the hottest thing on earth, as an example, can also be seen as taking psychodrama out of its box and move it to the biggest box out there; reality. In the end, it does not need to be true to obtain results; it only needs to be true to the actor.

Truth itself is a metaphysical concept and of little use in day to day life or when being goal-oriented. What counts there is what works.

D.

Top
#30128 - 09/28/09 10:54 AM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
You seem to confuse belief with the willingness to dive into ones own creation.

If you are an actor in a play, you know it is merely a play, a simplification of a reality invented by someone else but if you'd constantly need to remind yourself that you are merely a guy on stage pretending he is an invented persona saying words written down by another, you'd be a lousy actor. Good actors lose themselves in their role and become their character, they make the words real and enter that reality.
Once the role doesn't have benefits any longer, you drop it.

If you are your own god and you inhabit your own reality, what a dull god would you be if you would not be able to adjust that reality to your liking or to your needs?

Let's take it to simple examples. You're in the pub and you want to get into some girls pants. You aren't going to demand a verification first that you are her type or want a written thesis about her bed-qualities, so you'll know that the effort is not wasted. No, you create a stage and become an actor. You change your reality, and hers of course, in order to get what you want. Those that say that you just need to be yourself either have a lot of cash or don't get laid a lot.

The same when you go for a job interview; you create a character and toy with reality as long as it is advantageous. You'll never say 'Well actually I'm an average candidate for the job and it isn't too important for your company if you pick me or one of the twenty others that applied." No you lie and act as if the lie is true.

You can call it psychology or LBM or whatever you like but what you do is toy with your and other's reality and take advantage of that. That is the intention of creating these realities. Whether it is true or not is of little matter as long as you get the results you like.

And in the end we are back at Mythos it seems.

D.

Top
#30132 - 09/28/09 01:04 PM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Why does faith have such control over you that even when you discard it, it terrifies you that much you can't even see it as the tool it is and use it accordingly?

Vamamarga is a path of experience, a path of confrontation; going beyond good and evil in the Nietzschean sense. Avoidance only limits your personal progress.

It's your life like you said but not only are you missing out on the fun, you're also limiting your potential.

D.

Top
#30136 - 09/28/09 03:37 PM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3935
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
 Quote:

Faith is poison to me. I loathe it.

I've been singing this same song for many years. I've always seen faith(Faith, meaning in this instance,religious faith, that being a belief that can either not objectively be shown as true or it can objectively be shown to be untrue.) as a sort of mind virus. The second you allow yourself to assign truth to a proposition without evidence the wall between truth and fantasy has come down. Once something is 'true' based on faith alone, anything can be 'true'.

To me this is a problem of epic proportions.

I suppose this is because I personally place great value on logic and reason, and through them, knowledge. As faith is not and can never be a valid form of epistemology, all we really have to figure anything out is 'logos'.

'Mythos', while useful for emotional stimulation, will never give us knowledge, and as such, insofar as I am concerned anyway, will always be 'second banana'.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#30240 - 10/03/09 10:29 AM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: Dan_Dread]
97and107 Offline
member


Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 277
Loc: New Mexico
I have a friend who claimed logos was the true messiah mankind has sought for thousands of years. I believe the madness of faith belief is only a misplaced interpretation of instinct brought about by our recent development of large conglomerate societies. It has always been a weapon of dictators and empire, especially in the case of communism where deceptively "god" becomes government and you are expected to have faith in the government leaders, or in capitalism where you are expected to have faith in the corporation you buy product from or work for...

Unfortunate....

Top
#30242 - 10/03/09 11:56 AM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: 97and107]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3935
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
I have long felt that statism and further, patriotism/nationalism are theisms earthbound bastard cousins. In both cases a premise is offered that you are expected to swallow whole without examination, and in both cases examination weakens, if not destroys, the premise.

And , of course, both require faith to operate.

The 'God' meme is very flexible and contrary to popular belief, is not confined to religions.

In my eyes Anarchism(not black flags and firebombs, but serious Austrian school economic and political models) is political Atheism.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#30243 - 10/03/09 12:22 PM Re: Yet Another ONA Thread! [Re: Dan_Dread]
97and107 Offline
member


Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 277
Loc: New Mexico
Yes, I love Anarchism. (97. And 107 are gematric in some qabala for Satanist or Satan and Anarchy or Anarchist) that is interesting how you propose it as "true political Atheism". - will have to keep my eye on you.

I have a former friend who is Austrian royalty deposed during some cultural revolution and he held an absolute abhorrence for any kind of worship, even of other people. But he was not allied with Satanism (but!) By any definition could have been one.

Top
Page 5 of 10 « First<34567>Last »


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.022 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.