Page 2 of 6 <12345>Last »
Topic Options
#37963 - 04/21/10 02:41 PM Re: Prove it [Re: spinosaurus01]
Meq Offline
Banned
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 861
 Originally Posted By: spinosaurus01
I have an article you can read, but be open minded yeah?

http://www.angelfire.com/empire/serpentis666/garden.html

"Open-mindedness" is an important virtue when investigating what is true, as without being open to new ideas, one could never learn.

However, open-mindedness without critical thinking is NOT sufficient, as this video makes clear. (A link is also on the home page.)

I for one don't consider Joy of Satan's ideas to stand up to critical scrutiny.
Worth reading for a laugh though ;\)

 Originally Posted By: Joy of Satan
Humanity was created by extra-terrestrials who needed slave laborers in the mines. By taking the ovum from a Cro-Magnon/primate and using artificial insemination with a sperm from one of the Nephilim, we were created.

Now that's a good laugh.

Top
#37965 - 04/21/10 02:57 PM Re: Prove it [Re: Doomsage680]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
MawhrinSkel

Excellent post my friend. It does clarify some of the definitions.

Doomsage680

I feel that you continuously misunderstand or misinterpret me so I will try to keep it shorter and more to the point.

 Quote:
The onus is on you to prove that life has meaning outside of that which I give it.


Again, like the theism discussion (no I’m still not a theist), I never claimed life has an objective meaning. Please quote the place where you think I did. I was trying to prove to you that you believe or have faith in something that you cant prove to be true. You cant prove life has no meaning outside of what you make it. As far as I remember you are the one who claimed that you hold no faith and no belief in anything - you just seem to be all knowing and only lean on "truth". I dont say its a bad thing to strive for truth, for wanting truth, but I think people have the heads up their own asses if they think they KNOW the truth and never act on faith of belief.

 Quote:
No proof for will? There is a simple explanation for free will- it is a choice, from a limited range of conceivable choices, that one makes. What can you possibly mean by "there is no proof for such a thing?"


Seriously how much philosophy have you studied? You should know that the question of mans will, free will or non-will is a huge topic that has never been adequately answered. The thing is you can never prove that you actually can make several different choices because in the end you only do one and there can be good argument that that’s really the only choice you are able to make given the history of what has led you to this action. So as I see it you have Faith in this idea of free will (remember the definition MahwrinSkel posted that “faith is the confident belief or trust in the truth or trustworthiness of a person, concept or thing”).
In reality the human brain is conditioned to see the causal connections and it is quite easy to reason that our universe is entirely deterministic. Again dont misinterpret that this is my view on life - it is not - but if you think about it every action you take is taken because of something that happened before it. You may feel like you have choices but one can make the point that when you "choose" that is indeed the only option you could have gone with taken into account all variables. Its like the old though that if we knew one point fixation in space and knew all about it we could, theoretically, predict everything that will happen in the future from that point. And you hold the concept of the the world and man as non-deterministic as a matter of faith and belief because you cant prove that the world isn’t deterministic.

It wouldnt be the first time our minds deceive us. We also believe stones for example are solid when we now, through scientific knowledge, know that they arent (see sub-atomic physics) etc. My point is that no one has proven that man has free will (if you have you’d be the first human to do it). The free will thought generally comes from a view of dualism between body and mind (or soul or spirit or whatever). That the source of the will is somehow not bound in the material universe (because if it was, while will may be possible, it certainly wouldnt be free). On account in the will debate can be found in the stanford encyclopedia:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/#3.3

 Quote:
The will has also recently become a target of empirical study in neuroscience and cognitive psychology. Benjamin Libet (2002) conducted experiments designed to determine the timing of conscious willings or decisions to act in relation to brain activity associated with the physical initiation of behavior. Interpretation of the results is highly controversial. Libet himself concludes that the studies provide strong evidence that actions are already underway shortly before the agent wills to do it. As a result, we do not consciously initiate our actions, though he suggests that we might nonetheless retain the ability to veto actions that are initiated by unconscious psychological structures. Wegner (2002) masses a much range of studies (including those of Libet) to argue that the notion that human actions are ever initiated by their own conscious willings is simply a deeply-entrenched illusion and proceeds to offer an hypothesis concerning the reason this illusion is generated within our cognitive systems. O'Connor (forthcoming) argues that the data adduced by Libet and Wegner wholly fail to support their revisionary conclusions.


This is indeed more in line with Nietzsches notion rather than Descartes for example. And you seem to be way closer to Descartes from what I have read.

 Quote:
And I know all about Depression. I have overcome it. And it was deciding that I would live my life on my terms, not for others but for my own happiness, and that I would not put emotional stake in things outside myself for identity, that allowed me to overcome it. It's not faith.


So you didn’t have faith in yourself to be able to overcome it? You had reasonable belief? Would I interpret you right if I said that? See faith doesn’t have to be rooted in lies necessarily. It can also be that very thing that builds up our self-esteem by being there and believing in ourselves. Having faith in what you do is very important to man. One example is in elite sports where its more and more common with psychological training which both builds the mental strength but also provides deep faith that that something the athlete strives for is indeed possible.

 Quote:

I ask again, what beliefs do you hold based on faith, other than scientific discoveries(which isn't really faith but rather trust in scientists and their publications, which is reasonable)?


Again the definition of faith: “Faith is the confident belief or [b]trust[/] in the truth or trustworthiness of a person, concept or thing.” Did I make myself clear?

As for my beliefs. I believe that;
- all men are not equal
- the body and mind are really one and dependant on eachother (that is Im no fan of Descartes “cogito ergo sum”)
- the only thing that is unchanging is change itself.
- that the material is really empty (atomless in the philosophical sense of the word atom) – its all energy.
- that the world is, in the underlying reality of it all, non-dual.
- That Satan is a representation of this totally other wordview compared to monotheism for example where there is something unchanging in perfection, something that is dual, something that does divide man in body, soul and spirit etc.
- Ideas have an objective and independent existence outside of man (that is Im not a Platonist).

Happy?

Edit: Ok so I didnt keep it shorter but I hope I made it more clear and I hope that you avoid reading things into what I have written that I simply didnt write.


Edited by TheInsane (04/21/10 02:59 PM)

Top
#37966 - 04/21/10 03:13 PM Re: Prove it [Re: spinosaurus01]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
It is not the ability of being open-minded that is sufficient.
It is not the ability of critical thinking alone that is sufficient.
Critical thinking and open-minded thinking combined is not even sufficient.

The general attitude a person should have, should be the one wherein consideration, a good deal of egoism and knowledge, and critical thinking is needed. The first question which should float trough the mind is not: "is it possible?". it should be: "Do I gain something and should I give a fuck about it after the consideration if it will affect me in some way or another?".

When talking about religions and faith, the general guidelines and/or rules and ways of thinking are but a matter of "take it or leave it" being decided by "does it REALLY resonate on personal level?".

I applaud for 6's remark. It is a statement for all of you who live with the faith in something non-existing/dubious. I am all in for the attack approach for atheistic ideas.


Now I also read something along the lines of "the term Satanism is not copyrighted by those with atheistic views". Might I suggest taking the head out of your ass and point out it is neither copyrighted by those with theistic views? I am taking myself the right to define Satanism by the same atheistic standards ASL used. Anything which falls next to the boat will be called "pretending".

The Satanic philosophy has straight set out guidelines and can be followed by those with theistic views. The only conditions which will prevent a person from falling next to it, are written down in the Satanic statements and sins in a very condensed version. (Sadly enough, most even fail to gasp those and tend to use it for 1-time events to create illusionary feelings of superiority and pretended insight/intelligence, fuck'em).

Now to get back at the original topic;
Faith cannot be proven since it is a concept merely created by feelings. If a statement is being made and is being based on faith, then this statement will be automatically regarded as nonsense. Statements are being based upon FACTS, and if the factor of "faith in a person/thing" is being used then the reasons WHY should be used and the chances of luck being lower than 40%.

As said before by others: a negative cannot be proven.
This is self-explaining, either take it or leave it. Don't get it? --> study.


Edited by Dimitri (04/21/10 03:29 PM)
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#37968 - 04/21/10 03:49 PM Re: Prove it [Re: Dimitri]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
Dimitri

 Quote:

I applaud for 6's remark. It is a statement for all of you who live with the faith in something non-existing/dubious. I am all in for the attack approach for atheistic ideas.


See my above post. Im not talking about faith in God or a faith in a metaphysical Satan.

 Quote:

Now I also read something along the lines of "the term Satanism is not copyrighted by those with atheistic views". Might I suggest taking the head out of your ass and point out it is neither copyrighted by those with theistic views? I am taking myself the right to define Satanism by the same atheistic standards ASL used. Anything which falls next to the boat will be called "pretending".


I critique theistic satanists all the time as well (especially the idiots in temple of the black light) but on these boards there tends to be mostly atheists (which I myself also am) so therefore the critique is directed more in that direction in these surroundings.

And we've been through the definition of Satanism problem before so its unneccesarry to get into it again. The previous discussion can be found here: http://www.the600club.com/topic35134-1.html

Top
#37971 - 04/21/10 05:30 PM Re: Prove it [Re: TheInsane]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1640
Loc: Orlando, FL


I don't quite understand the relevance of the article. Like all the other JoS rants, it's full of half-baked psuedoscience and false correlations that could be easily solved by retaking the 4th grade.

I've got some time to kill while my dinner's in the oven, so here goes an easy one:

 Quote:
By taking the ovum from a Cro-Magnon/primate and using artificial insemination with a sperm from one of the Nephilim, we were created.


An alien lifeform and a Cro-Magnon could never mate through artificial insemination, as their genetic makeup would be completely different and the disparate number of chromosomes would make fertilization impossible.

 Quote:
We did not evolve naturally, as opposed to animals who have overall better health and immunity.


Do I really need to cover this one? Take a biology class. We're pretty much the same as other animals, except for our envious ability to kill ourselves off with a dazzling array of modern technology.

 Quote:
This stage under a microscope looks just like an APPLE.


Of course, trying to draw a false parallel between two things simply because they look similar. This is made even more invalid by the fact that most ancient sources say that the Forbidden Fruit was actually a date or citron. The "apple" idea was thought up by ignorant Westerners who only ate apples and didn't know what the fuck a date was.

 Quote:
The Flower of Life is the blueprint for every living thing.


It's a man-made geometric design. It bears absolutely no resemblance to any genetic sequence.

 Quote:
This was the sole intention by the angels who communicated the information to Dr. John Dee and Edward Kelly.


If the JoS have such a beef with Enochian material being "bad", then why did they follow in LaVey's (whom they also hate) footsteps of ripping off the Calls? Oh, wait, that's because they're a lot of unoriginal wankers with shallow, dickwad beliefs, which is why they have to Frankenstein their religion together with disparate bits from the New Age shelf of Barnes & Noble and selectively ignore all the evidence that doesn't support their crackpot Xenu-esque fantasies.

I rest my case.
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#37979 - 04/21/10 09:21 PM Re: Prove it [Re: The Zebu]
Doomsage680 Offline
member


Registered: 10/01/09
Posts: 111
Loc: NJ, USA
Zebu,
as someone who used to take cues and random bits of info from JoS, I can say you are completely Right, it's a huge ton of bullshit and a big waste of time.

TheInsane,
I agree that no one can "know" that we don't live in a deterministic world, but as I said, until a shred of evidence is presented that I don't have free will, there is no reason to believe it. You can't falsify a negative, and inability to falsify a negative is not equal to validating a positive. I defined free will as a choice from a range of possible choices- this takes into account that it is influenced by past events. But you make it sound like people live a roller-coaster life where one action leads to another without any thinking. I would say that for example, yesterday, I sat around a lot. I could have watched tv or checked facebook. There was no limiting factor that made me do one or another, and to say that there was has no basis in reality. Sure my curiosity might be more inclined towards one than another, but the idea that I potentially only had a single choice is just wishful thinking.
Frankly, philosophers do a lot of mental masturbation, coming up with ridiculous unfounded ideas. Even Descartes, as he believed that since it is possible to imagine a perfect being, it must exist.
It's also a way to settle for the way one's life has turned out.

You seem to think that because I live based on having a reason to think or act rather than having blind faith, that I am some kind of hypocrite. You can push this "truth cannot be known" agenda, but the fact is that I have a reason for everything I do, think, say, and believe. It doesn't even matter if we live in a deterministic world because unless I believed that, I would not be dismayed in working towards goals.
I'm not misinterpreting anything you say, unless you're saying that faith is the same as belief and that reason isn't closer to truth than irrationality.
I agree with everything you pointed out there, but I don't see how it disfavors cogito ergo sum.

My only self-evident beliefs are these-
happiness. it is its own reason and own reward.
Survival. it is its own reason and own reward.

Everything else comes from rationally interacting with the world. I don't see how any of my beliefs are based on irrationality. Life has no meaning other than that which I give it, because no one else could give my life meaning in a way that makes me happy. If it is another person, it is then a relationship we mutually made meaningful. I don't see how you can logically dispute this.
_________________________
"I who have nothing but the comfort of my sins"
- Vinny Paz

Top
#37991 - 04/22/10 04:06 AM Re: Prove it [Re: Doomsage680]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
Doomsage680

 Quote:

I'm not misinterpreting anything you say, unless you're saying that faith is the same as belief and that reason isn't closer to truth than irrationality.


You thought I was a theist. I also never said that I held beliefs without reason. Thats what I was talking about that you misinterpreted in reading my messages.

 Quote:
I agree that no one can "know" that we don't live in a deterministic world, but as I said, until a shred of evidence is presented that I don't have free will, there is no reason to believe it. You can't falsify a negative, and inability to falsify a negative is not equal to validating a positive.


Actually there is no proof whatsoever that a free will exists scientifically. Either one is of the old school and thinks we are deterministically bound (in the biological and not theological sense) or one believes the quantum physics theory which probably means that while the word isnt deterministic per se it neither includes an element like a will that conciously makes descicions. I think its up to you to prove, scientifically, that a thing such as will exists and also if this will is free or not.

It is you who believe in a free will without evidence for it to exist. Therefore its up to you o prove that it exists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will#Physics


 Quote:

You seem to think that because I live based on having a reason to think or act rather than having blind faith, that I am some kind of hypocrite.


Again you misinterpret me. I never even wrote the words "blind faith". I dislike blind faith as much as the next guy. I think you are a hypocrite for holding faith and belief in certain ideas that cant be proven like free will that science actually has always tended to disprove if anything. But you still critize other for having faith and belief in other concepts.


 Quote:
You can push this "truth cannot be known" agenda, but the fact is that I have a reason for everything I do, think, say, and believe.


This is a funny type-o in regards to this discussion. In a deterministic world there is indeed a reason for everything you do. Its called action and reaction ;\)

 Quote:
But you make it sound like people live a roller-coaster life where one action leads to another without any thinking. I would say that for example, yesterday, I sat around a lot. I could have watched tv or checked facebook. There was no limiting factor that made me do one or another, and to say that there was has no basis in reality. Sure my curiosity might be more inclined towards one than another, but the idea that I potentially only had a single choice is just wishful thinking.


http://mises.org/daily/1943


Again remember that Im not necessarilly putting forth my beliefs here at all times. I try to make you realize that your notion of a free will has no base in either pre-modern or modern science. Free will is at large a concept of faith and belief that most often springs from the thought of a theological universe.


Edited by TheInsane (04/22/10 04:07 AM)

Top
#37995 - 04/22/10 05:15 AM Re: Prove it [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
Agreed 100%.

And a more interesting focus is probably what freedom actually is. Are we "free from", "free to" or "free of"? Is freedom, as a concept, even possible. These are huge questions that no one can answer in a completely satisfying way but it is still very interesting \:\)

Top
#37997 - 04/22/10 05:41 AM Re: Prove it [Re: TheInsane]
spinosaurus01 Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/24/10
Posts: 14
Oooh! Oooh!

I can prove it!

Wait for iiiit, wait for iiiit.....]

....

THE BIBLE SAYS SO!!!! Therefore it must be true ;\) *gasp!*

Top
#38004 - 04/22/10 11:51 AM Re: Prove it [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
William Wright Offline
active member


Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 860
Loc: Nashville
MawhrinSkel, while I enjoyed your opening post, I still don’t see a difference between belief and faith except that faith is often used more in a religious/theistic context. Faith is still believing in something, no matter how you slice it.

I really don’t have a problem with faith. People can believe whatever they want, whether I agree with it or not. Who am I to tell a theist he is wrong? He believes there is a god; I believe there isn’t. We can argue till the cows come home, but at the end of the day we’re only spinning our wheels (and pissing each other off) because neither of us know.

What frustrates me about many religious believers is not that they believe in something, but that they speak with a certainty that suggests they can’t possibly be wrong. They don’t say heaven and hell might exist. They say heaven and hell DO exist, and it’s their mission to convince me they exist.

I understand why they do it. When considering the issue of life itself – the nature of life, what it all “means”, etc. – belief seems inadequate. There is a tremendous pressure to know because so much is at stake. But the answer is not to confuse belief with knowledge. The answer, as I see it, is to focus on what I actually know.

What do I know? I know that I’m alive. I know that I have the ability to make good things happen for myself, and I know that my time and energy are better spent living in the real world instead of burdening myself with the endless variety of paranormal hypotheticals out there.

I view theistic religions the same way I view the ancient Greek myths – interesting stories occasionally containing powerful life lessons, but myths all the same. Until I see conclusive proof otherwise, I will continue to hold this view.
_________________________
In Minecraft all chickens are spies.

Top
#38005 - 04/22/10 12:06 PM Re: Prove it [Re: TheInsane]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
I have made my points clear and comprehensive enough for any low-IQ person to gasp.
Read closer and better, I spoke about faith in general (including faith in a real person or object).
And I did not see any reference to you, so I am starting to wonder why the hell you even bothered to reply.

 Quote:
I critique theistic satanists all the time as well (especially the idiots in temple of the black light) but on these boards there tends to be mostly atheists (which I myself also am) so therefore the critique is directed more in that direction in these surroundings.

Reread the OP (6's) before puking.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#38008 - 04/22/10 12:54 PM Re: Prove it [Re: Dimitri]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
I have made my points clear and comprehensive enough for any low-IQ person to gasp.
Read closer and better, I spoke about faith in general (including faith in a real person or object).
And I did not see any reference to you, so I am starting to wonder why the hell you even bothered to reply.

 Quote:
I critique theistic satanists all the time as well (especially the idiots in temple of the black light) but on these boards there tends to be mostly atheists (which I myself also am) so therefore the critique is directed more in that direction in these surroundings.

Reread the OP (6's) before puking.


Its an open discussion on a public internet forum. Whats your problem with me replying to what you write? You did refer to a post I made on the theistic and atheistic debate within satanic circles.

And just because you present you thoughts here doesnt mean everyone will agree with them - low, medium or high IQ with all due respect ;\)

Top
#38023 - 04/23/10 12:19 AM Re: Prove it [Re: TheInsane]
Doomsage680 Offline
member


Registered: 10/01/09
Posts: 111
Loc: NJ, USA
"Actually there is no proof whatsoever that a free will exists scientifically. Either one is of the old school and thinks we are deterministically bound (in the biological and not theological sense) or one believes the quantum physics theory which probably means that while the word isnt deterministic per se it neither includes an element like a will that conciously makes descicions. I think its up to you to prove, scientifically, that a thing such as will exists and also if this will is free or not. "

What are you talking about? Scientists know how the brain works. We have chemicals that influence our decisions, the ability to comprehend our environment, and the ability to make decisions. Here's an "experiment". Decide to start scratching yourself. Stop if you want. Then keep going. Rinse and repeat.

In terms of free will, for example, when I freestyle(rapping while verbalizing thoughts rhythmically and impromptu), I think of many potential words to say to rhyme or continue a theme. I don't see how, biologically, the choice of words I say is limited(the list might be but my decisions to use one and save another for the future isn't), as I take an active role in choosing them, looking at surroundings and utilizing them, and doing everything else involved, including changing tones, changing rhythms, and maybe even changing languages. All human decisions cannot be defined by biological urges, as many have nothing to do with any need related to survival.

Of course I have the will to do as I want when I want, and yes it is free, as I have defined it- a choice from a range of choices as defined by reality. I don't shove crayons into doorknobs because there is no reason to, and I will not have an urge to do so because, biologically, there is no reason to do such a thing. You're saying that either everything is controlled by some god or that the random events of quantum physics mean everything is random- yet only the insane or psychologically disturbed will act without reason.
Our decisions are based on our biology as formed by evolution, social norms, and legal demands. Fuck whatever philosophers you think demonstrate that a free will doesn't exist. That belief is, again, meaningless, and since I have no reason to believe that something else controls my will, there is no doubt that I am in control. If indeed I discovered that my will was entirely controlled by some other force, wouldn't it be curious to think that I was capable of discovering such a thing without retaking control? That would mean I was a mind trapped in a body unable to act. Yet I act only when I want, doing what I want.

The random actions outside of cause and effect that happen on a quantum level, such as particles popping into and out of existence, happen on such a rare and small scale that it is invalid to believe that our own decisions are themselves random and not free. I only ever make decisions to do things that are possible- if our will wasn't free, wouldn't it manifest itself in someone doing very strange and misunderstood random acts? Wouldn't we all do strange illogical random acts?
If quantum physics was as random as you make it seem as to not allow for free will, we would be as likely to fall through solid objects at common intervals. Indeed, the randomness of the universe does not take affect in such ways, and the idea that our will isn't free because every particle started on a set course ignores the fact that our brains can conceive and decide to do things.

The only way to believe that there may not be such a thing as free will is to create another plane where a being or entirely random energy affects our reality, and this is something that has no proof.

The argument you are making against free will in saying that I need to provide proof it exists is the same as theists saying to prove God doesn't exist. I think, therefore I am. I know that my thoughts aren't trapped inside my brain, and I know that my life has not been me watching myself live but rather me learning and making new decisions with new actions. There is no reason to believe that I am not in control, as I have decided every single thing I wrote here. Chemicals might influence our brains but the content of these words was decided by my mind and my will put them onto this forum. I have no reason to believe something else of any nature is in control.
You are making a very cheap point in trying to say that "I don't know, therefore, I do indeed live my life based on faith".

I'm making the point that I have reason to believe I have free will, and indeed, no reason to believe the opposite, and that because I make all decisions based on some kind of reason, there is no room for faith. You can tell yourself that free will might not exist but where does it get you? This idea goes nowhere. A claim is not legitimate unless it is falsifiable, and deciding to believe that any proof is a part of a greater scheme of a will-less deterministic universe is irrational.

It is also a form of the Argument from Ignorance to say that because YOU don't understand how the brain works neurologically, it therefore doesn't have free will and that free will is unprovable.

This argument is pointless as you are just going to say, no matter what you do to prove a free will, you can't prove that That wasn't predetermined too!
To me this is the same thing as faith- baseless belief that no matter what, you can't totally "disprove" whatever idea you decide to ascribe to.
And I never said that action and reaction weren't valid. But humans are sentient beings capable of reacting differently to the same things and creating different actions that cause different reactions. You leave out the part of the human mind and just assume we're all dominoes in a chain of events.

It's too easy to say that free will is a concept that springs from a theological universe. Most concepts spring from some theological basis, as most people and most ideas were related to theology for the significant part of human history, and I would argue it is markedly the idea that there is no free will that especially comes from a theistic background.
_________________________
"I who have nothing but the comfort of my sins"
- Vinny Paz

Top
#38025 - 04/23/10 01:41 AM Re: Prove it [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Mindmaster Offline
pledge


Registered: 03/17/10
Posts: 68
Loc: Detroit, MI
 Originally Posted By: 6Satan6Archist6
Every now and then this site gets people who maintain that Satan, as an actual living entity, exists. I invite all who make such claims to prove it.

Disclaimer: Do NOT try to use faith as proof. I do not care if you can "just feel" its presence, I want undeniable, verifiable proof. If you can not do this then please do not assert any such claims as fact.


This is fun really... 'ere we go! So do you believe in some sort of idea of dark thought yourself that decides that you aren't entirely an Atheist only? Welp, you just found your Devil. Game over. Sure, I can explain.

The philosophers of the past from the times of Pythagoras to the Chaldeans, and the Cabalists all had the belief that "God" or the divine existed and man was created in its image, thus by logical extension "man" was accurately a microcosmic God containing of a divine spark. Thus, and contained within a man thus has a logical correspondence somewhere else in the universal pea soup which reflected the divine aspect of this particular form or archetype. As above, so below; so below, as above. Man, logically in conventional mysticism was a "mini-God" or self-contained universe of consciousness. We seem to function accordingly as well don't we? That which exists within us exists without us by this analogy. I guess when you don't have so many TV's and video games you spend your life trying to figure out things. :P

LaVey obviously drew from the sources of classical hermetic thought in his own books. It would be relatively silly to believe he didn't think anything of it when he gleened the materials in a somewhat altered form and penned them into The Satanic Bible. One doesn't trouble themselves with incorporating the ideas for which they don't believe in. But, LaVey was a pretty smart guy and probably realized the average waste of humanity on this rock doesn't care about their spiritual advancement. So he probably decided there was more gold to be had in Satanic tourism, and I'd tend to agree. What'd he personally believe? Well, do your homework and do the math... I doubt he'd bother to read Aleister Crowley, John Dee, or any of the other classical references if he thought it was 100% hogwash. It's truly hard to read through these types of things when you intellectually reject them completely as had been the case in my own youth.

To understand Crowley in particular you need a good backing in esoterica to understand anything the man writes. You need a comprehensive knowledge of correspondences just to make heads or tails of most of it. Conversely, TSB enochian keys are just adapted from Crowley's _Equinox_ publishing with every god word replaced with "Satan" or other minor alterations. Surely, one goes through all of this trouble for no apparent reason. :P I think LaVey had a very real perception of the forces that be, but it doesn't sell as many books and memberships. The Church of Satan probably neutered itself and became an entirely secular institution for this reason alone. It's far easier to get money from rich folks when you're just "playing" with the devil verses doing the devils work.

All that being said, I probably would share your views if I didn't understand that a vehement disbelief of any concept is putting you in the same muddy water as those who have faith without reason. Your eyes are tightly closed in either case and do not aid any spiritual development or understanding. Classically, "The Devil" is in the details; If you seek self-gratification over self-denial, your will over "gods will", and seek to break free of conventions then you are obviously proving this existence of this force through your own action regardless of your beliefs. You can deny that those things exist but that doesn't change the obvious manifestation in your consciousness and by extension very real presence.

Perhaps, you then could answer the question of why you live in the self-denial typically associated with Christians? Denial of the forces present within your own mind and that you have nothing in common with them nor derive no pleasure in that relationship! Verily, you mock it like a disappointed school-girl and seem disappointed that the boogie man didn't decide to show up at your house, but did visit your friends a night since passed!

Needless to say, I can't believe in the Satan someone else creates for me nor can you! But, I do believe one can reach inside to increase that power infinitely and perhaps experience it directly by extension which tends to be an accurate realization in relation to my own meanderings. This view is nothing new, and has been held by traditional mystics since the time of the ancient Egyptians and possibly before. I perhaps would view similarly to you if "Modern Satanism" could possibly be a large enough container for my experiences, but I have found it lacking in many ways. It perhaps accurately describes a traveler starting on a journey in earnest, but it is not very far along the left hand path that one realizes the insufficiencies. Nonetheless, it's very much a part of my core and a love the idealism of it validates it's personal relevance to me. It's a part of me, but I've become much more.

Many Satanists read the TSB and like what they see, and then they refuse to do any leg work because "all of these things don't exist" or whatever. It is the standard cop-out! Exploring spiritual paths would make you un-Satanic or other such nonsense. I'm declaring war on you types as you are putrid wastes of humanity that would do much better as fertilizer than a Satanist. You are as weak as the Christians, but instead of having an open fear of spiritual awakening you have a backward-talking fear of the irrational. The defense to the positions they have is "shields up", thus neither know anything at all.

Surely, this view is unpopular with the types that frequent this forum... that there could be something not explained. Realize that all ideals, views, and beliefs are an ongoing process of evolution which requires the seeker to seek. Stasis is death in all things! LaVey's ideas were very good for his time, but are they comprehensive enough to explain the experiences we are having now? Are they to be regarded is a mere stepping stone on the journey? Only time will tell, but we have to keep moving forward or fall to the side as inferiority slips into the core of the philosophy.

I apologize for the length of this thanks for being patient. :P

- Mind

Top
#38029 - 04/23/10 06:42 AM Re: Prove it [Re: Doomsage680]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
Doomsage680

I wont go into detail about everything in your post since at large it seemed like ranting without giving any scientific proof (even though you say you’re so fond of science and truth). Funny how it is I who have directed you to scientific sources.
 Quote:
I'm making the point that I have reason to believe I have free will, and indeed, no reason to believe the opposite, and that because I make all decisions based on some kind of reason, there is no room for faith. You can tell yourself that free will might not exist but where does it get you?

It is also a form of the Argument from Ignorance to say that because YOU don't understand how the brain works neurologically, it therefore doesn't have free will and that free will is unprovable.

Maybe your reason betrays you then…
Im sorry to say but I think its you who make an ass out of yourself. I did provide links to works that explains why free will is very much something to doubt that humans have. I will do it again and please read it this time. This is neurological science that as far as science goes today proves that there is no base for a thing such as free will:

http://bioethics.stanford.edu/conference/hallett.pdf

Now I challenge you to go out there and find a neurological science report that supports the idea of free will on a scientific basis. I think this is fair since you call me ignorant but its you who can’t provide scientific evidence of what you claim to be true.

 Quote:
The argument you are making against free will in saying that I need to provide proof it exists is the same as theists saying to prove God doesn't exist.

It’s the other way around actually. Theists believe in God but no one has been able to prove his/her/its existence. Therefore its up to them to prove it. You believe in free will but no one has been able to prove its existence. Therefore its up to you to prove it.


 Quote:
If quantum physics was as random as you make it seem as to not allow for free will, we would be as likely to fall through solid objects at common intervals.

No and if you knew anything about quantum physics you would know why. The Wikipedia introduction is actually alright so start there; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_physics



Edited by TheInsane (04/23/10 06:42 AM)

Top
Page 2 of 6 <12345>Last »


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

Generated in 0.036 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.