RRC Archives

dhuff wrote:Justin, that statement is saying that if everyone looked out for everyone else more than themselves, the world would be better. I don't feel like that's narcissistic at all. I think it's quite true.

Have you read "Atlas Shrugged?" You probably wouldn't like it, but it is the antithesis of the statement you wrote here and a very good book all about the ego. Not an ego thing, or maybe it is, but I still think looking out for yourself is #1 b/c you can't look out for others until you do that anyway, not in the "best" way anyway.

If you hadn't gotten to where you are through your own experiences how could you begin to look out for or care about others? I think ego is #1 on whatever path your own may lead you down. I am quite a selfish person though by any normal standards.

[quote="dhuff"]
Having established that, let's look at the nature of the soul. The nature of the soul--which is our true self; the body is just a vessel--is to give freely. The soul accepts all others openly. The soul wants to help others as much as possible. The soul is pure in all aspects, not tainted by worldly temptations or the urge to hold some form of power over anyone else. I think that also is something we can all agree on.

What bothers me is how you state this as fact. As if you somehow "know" these things as opposed to having "faith" or "believing".

WHo says the soul's true nature is to give freely and accept others? Self preservation is the first law of nature.

Word to Camus, and embracing the Absurd Man.

dhuff you are cogitating from the pre- 1750's. Join the new millennium.

Audio
http://blogs.wnyc.org/radiolab/2009/07/27/after-life/
In-depth and encyclopedic
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/death-definition/

Basically the brain creates consciousness (in its broadest definition). Consciousness (whatever it is) is TOTALLY soluble in general anesthetic. There is a standby switch! When it is thrown there is no sense of time. There is no cognition. There are no out-of-body experiences under general anesthesia. Strange perceptions happen in the twilight between unconscious and conscious. Under general anesthesia they can amputate your arm with a circular saw and you would not know it.

If the standby switch shuts you down, why does it make sense that the off switch (death) is going to fire up your cognition again? The operation of the brain is approaching quantifability. There are no cognition operation thus far that have been identified as extra-cranial.

Your philosophical position starting from 'soul' is not one that you can logically expect that all simply accept. As for the rest of what you think you know . . .

Audio
http://blogs.wnyc.org/radiolab/2009/07/27/after-life/
Wes & others: Minute 26:30. Sobering/ Gripping. Reminds me of Terry. I only had one really involved conversation with Terry; my fur and bits of my flesh flew during the 'conversation'.

Well I'm not going to try to argue the point that there is a soul. That hasn't been fruitful and really is not what I should be doing here. And, as a few of you have called me out on, I have let my own ego get the best of me by trying to convince people of my own beliefs. I apologize for that. But because of that fundamental disagreement between myself and what seems like the majority of posters on here, I can't truly get out the message I was originally trying to present. But all previous posts aside, I just hope everyone can stay as positive as possible through all experiences and in those experiences try to spread as much light and gather as much wisdom as possible.

dhuff wrote:Well I'm not going to try to argue the point that there is a soul.

Nothing wrong with doing so if that is what you believe. If you have a good reason to believe that there is a soul the argument will come real easy and you will convince all the reasonable people in here. However, before you accuse everyone of being close-minded for not buying your convictions, ask yourself how open-minded you are and whether or not your mind is too open.

dhuff wrote: That hasn't been fruitful and really is not what I should be doing here. And, as a few of you have called me out on, I have let my own ego get the best of me by trying to convince people of my own beliefs. I apologize for that.

What on earth are you apologizing for? The reasons we talk are to try to reposition others and reposition ourselves. The reason your argument failed is because it is a failed premise. Isn't this a possibility for you? There are probably also no fairies on the moon. But the argument for the soul actually has negative evidence that debunks it. The fairies on the moon hypothesis is still possible, although not probable because it is a rather arbitrary position.

dhuff wrote:But because of that fundamental disagreement between myself and what seems like the majority of posters on here, I can't truly get out the message I was originally trying to present.

Do you really mean to say that your original message predicated on the existence of the soul?? How and why is that so?

I've got soul. And I'm super-bad.

wes i agree wth your, "nature is everywhere" its true. outside is outside. when i'm inside i think of the outside but i laugh at where i'm at. when i'm happy i want to make others happy. when i'm sad, i want to make others happy so they don't feel like i do. sometimes it makes me feel good. and thats fine, its not why i do it. THAT is where the "ego" part lies. do you do for you or for the better of others/all?
do you climb for the #s or the experience, etc., etc.

and yes, we most work 0n #1 to be the best for us so that we may be the best for others. we don't have to force others to agree for they never will. we must be examples, light for the ships off course. and if they still steer for the rocks, we must be willing to help pick up the pieces and set them sail again.

and no WES, we have met.

Caribe: My original post concerned the coming change in the earth's vibrational field and how it is going to basically break down the three dimensional barrier of what we can perceive. And I guess you, among other people, don't believe there is a higher vibrational plane that we exist on, which would make all this seem absurd. Folks will argue that it's a ridiculous idea, but I consider myself a pretty intelligent person and it does not in any way seem inconceivable to me. When you look at the nature of our reality, this all starts to make much more sense. All physical matter on a subatomic level behaves as both a particle and a wave. This has been scientifically proven. I don't know by who, but I'm sure you could look it up pretty easily. Probably the Russians. But after learning that the building blocks of all matter also behave as waves of energy, it became pretty simple for me to understand that we are limited by our sensory organs. Think about a dog whistle, the kind you can't hear but the dog can. Such a high frequency that we can't hear it. Why wouldn't light behave the same way? And since everything that makes up our world is just vibrational energy, doesn't it make sense that there could be other levels of existence on different frequencies that we are unable to perceive due to our limited senses?