Do you believe in demons?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Lord Knightfa11
do you believe in evil angels tampering with the way we live our lives?

Wild Shadow
i believe there may be non corporeal entities/ or some type of trans dimensional beings... i dont know if i would call them demons in a religious sense....

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
do you believe in evil angels tampering with the way we live our lives?

What Shaky?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
do you believe in evil angels tampering with the way we live our lives?


NO! Demons and angels are figures of mythology. They have meaning when taken in context of their mythology, but they should never be taken literally.

Wild Shadow
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
NO! Demons and angels are figures of mythology. They have meaning when taken in context of their mythology, but they should never be taken literally.



i gotta tell you bro u dont strike me as being very good buddhist assuming that you read and try to follow the buddha's teachings..

where is the loving thought the respectful action in your words.. converting by the transmission of love,

living in balance with the abstract forces of the universe.. you seem to lean and fall more on being a smart ass and being a troll with your comments...

dont get me wrong or take it the wrong way, i tend to enjoy it i just cant get over the fact that everything you say is followed by a picture cover of the Shakyamuni Son Lotus..pretty contradictory if you ask me :P

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i gotta tell you bro u dont strike me as being very good buddhist assuming that you read and try to follow the buddha's teachings..

where is the loving thought the respectful action in your words.. converting by the transmission of love,

living in balance with the abstract forces of the universe.. you seem to lean and fall more on being a smart ass and being a troll with your comments...

dont get me wrong or take it the wrong way, i tend to enjoy it i just cant get over the fact that everything you say is followed by a picture cover of the Shakyamuni Son Lotus..pretty contradictory if you ask me :P

I don't see what you are saying. The thread starter asked a question, and I gave you a straight forward answer. How is that trolling and being a smart ass?

Also, what does "transmission of love" have to do with Buddhism?

THE JLRTENJAC
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
NO! Demons and angels are figures of mythology. They have meaning when taken in context of their mythology, but they should never be taken literally.

Wow, straight, forward, and to the point. You don't dance around issues do you Shak?

But then again I can respect a man who is divoted to his faith... anyway.

In answer to Knightfall's question:
Yup, Demons and Angels are existant beings.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by THE JLRTENJAC
Wow, straight, forward, and to the point. You don't dance around issues do you Shak?

But then again I can respect a man who is divoted to his faith... anyway.

In answer to Knightfall's question:
Yup, Demons and Angels are existant beings.

What do you base your opinion on? My opinion is based on the fact that there is no physical evidence for Demons.

Wild Shadow
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I don't see what you are saying. The thread starter asked a question, and I gave you a straight forward answer. How is that trolling and being a smart ass?


not here per se, but i been reading some of your post from other threads you seem to try and antagonize a certain member. it is still funny i just had to mention it..

Also, what does "transmission of love" have to do with Buddhism?




it has to do with it a lot... just like the transmission knowledge wisdom, kindness... always being thoughtful in ones actions whether you are cooking cleaning or simply typing on a key board..

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
it has to do with it a lot... just like the transmission knowledge wisdom, kindness... always being thoughtful in ones actions whether you are cooking cleaning or simply typing on a key board..

Back on topic.

Wild Shadow
so shaky do you believe in non corporeal entities at all?

they dont have to be angels or demons maybe ghost poltergiest..
or just some unknown alien entities.. pure consciousness with no physical anchor..

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
so shaky do you believe in non corporeal entities at all?

they dont have to be angels or demons maybe ghost poltergiest..
or just some unknown alien entities.. pure consciousness with no physical anchor..

I do not believe in the supernatural.

What do you mean by "non corporeal entities"?

Wild Shadow
Hypothetical life that exists without material bodies. The idea has been extensively explored in science fiction (see Childhood's End) but, from the viewpoint of science itself, the concept of life based on "pure energy," such as electromagnetic radiation, poses significant difficulties. A being made only of photons, for example, could not move slower than the speed of light and would essentially exist outside of the normal time stream of the rest of the universe. Artificial life represents a possible alternative form of noncorporeal life with a basis in information.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
Hypothetical life that exists without material bodies. The idea has been extensively explored in science fiction (see Childhood's End) but, from the viewpoint of science itself, the concept of life based on "pure energy," such as electromagnetic radiation, poses significant difficulties. A being made only of photons, for example, could not move slower than the speed of light and would essentially exist outside of the normal time stream of the rest of the universe. Artificial life represents a possible alternative form of noncorporeal life with a basis in information.

Science fiction is great and all, and I like a good science fiction story as much as anyone else, but I don't base my beliefs on it. If demons live outside of our existence, then they could not interact with us. If they can interact with us, then they will leave physical evidence of this interaction. So far, there is no evidence for this interaction.

Lord Knightfa11
there are all of these "ghost sitings" and things like that...

Red Nemesis
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
there are all of these "ghost sitings" and things like that...

And how many of those have been substantiated?

Wild Shadow
i seen some scary video tapes that show weird movements of objects when no one is present..

i wish there would be some serious study of strange phenomenal, i liked to think there is something to some of these "ghost sightings"

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i seen some scary video tapes that show weird movements of objects when no one is present..

i wish there would be some serious study of strange phenomenal, i liked to think there is something to some of these "ghost sightings"

There have been studies, but all ghosts turn out to be hoaxes or something natural that is misinterpreted.

Wild Shadow
the "all" generalization keeps me from believing you .... sorry

i remember seeing a video about hunted train tracks where a bus full of children died.. ppl put a car in the middle of the tracks covered with baby powder. the car slowly moved up hill without having the engine on..
the car was examined and it had, hand prints all over the back of the wind shields bumper the size of children hands...

not saying it is real because i wasn't there but it makes me wonder..

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
the "all" generalization keeps me from believing you .... sorry

i remember seeing a video about hunted train tracks where a bus full of children died.. ppl put a car in the middle of the tracks covered with baby powder. the car slowly moved up hill without having the engine on..
the car was examined and it had, hand prints all over the back of the wind shields bumper the size of children hands...

not saying it is real because i wasn't there but it makes me wonder..

Videos are not science. You can make anything happen in videos. I was talking about the scientific studies that I have read about.

If you know of any FACTS that support the idea of ghosts or demons, please post them.

Lord Knightfa11
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
the "all" generalization keeps me from believing you .... sorry

i remember seeing a video about hunted train tracks where a bus full of children died.. ppl put a car in the middle of the tracks covered with baby powder. the car slowly moved up hill without having the engine on..
the car was examined and it had, hand prints all over the back of the wind shields bumper the size of children hands...

not saying it is real because i wasn't there but it makes me wonder.. link to the video, please?

Wild Shadow
no.. i do not have any proof or evidence that show they exist or don't.. just like i cant proof the existence of a higher being..

what facts could i possibly present to you in this regard?

if i show you video recording, you can just as easily dismiss it as proof, and find another explaination..

but there are plenty of phenomenal that science has yet to view and disprove perhaps some of them could be legitimate.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
no.. i do not have any proof or evidence that show they exist or don't.. just like i cant proof the existence of a higher being..

what facts could i possibly present to you in this regard?

if i show you video recording, you can just as easily dismiss it as proof, and find another explaination..

but there are plenty of phenomenal that science has yet to view and disprove perhaps some of them could be legitimate.

A link to a scientific publication with an article that proves some aspect of this topic would be sufficient.

Red Nemesis
There has not been a single instance of scientifically substantiated paranormality. I could attempt to prove this by linking to every pertinent case ever, or you could save time (and much frustration) by proving your assertion: "paranormal/non-corporeal entities exist." You have not yet done so.

Wild Shadow
i never claimed they did i simply stated it could be possible.. "may be"

what do you all think of white noise recordings?

Lord Knightfa11
lol i just want to see the recording because it sounds interesting. I'm not going to debate against it, lol.

Wild Shadow
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
lol i just want to see the recording because it sounds interesting. I'm not going to debate against it, lol.




i dont have the link i saw the video almost 10yrs ago but if you search google... san antonio ghost track children... you'll find reports maybe some home videos of it... really sorry that i dont have the video..

King Kandy
I don't see a reason to believe in unsubstantiated videos.

Wild Shadow
nor do i, but it still makes me curious of the possibility

Kelly_Bean
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
do you believe in evil angels tampering with the way we live our lives?
No, not really.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
do you believe in evil angels tampering with the way we live our lives?

Nope. I do believe in Satan worshiping leprechauns that do that, though.

inimalist
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
what facts could i possibly present to you in this regard?


physical evidence?

A photograph that isn't found to be a hoax in under 45 seconds?

fresh fingerprints made by the hands of dead people?

video evidence?

the best kind of evidence, though, would be repeatable. So, like, make a prediction: "because X is haunted, we would expect to see Y when we do Z". So like, if there were a haunted place where there were predictable things one might see, then you might have some evidence.

one off instances of things people can't explain are pretty lame.

Darth Exodus
If by believe in demons you mean dress up like one and dance round my neighbours house while their asleep then no, no I don't.


angel_not

ushomefree

Wild Shadow
oh god.. did you really have to use such big fonds? and ummm.... i though god did change his mind quiet frequently..

Red Nemesis
sick
I cringed.


Noah's Arc? Genesis? The Garden of Eden? None of these were correct.

Jack Daniels
God didnt change his mind...we did.......that sounds right..lol

Digi
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
sick
I cringed.

You must not know ushome too well, then.

....

My two cents:

Any form of paranormal phenomenon must have some affect on material reality. Otherwise, we would not perceive it as paranormal, since there would be no way to detect it. Ghosts, for example: incorporeal, but people "see" them, suggesting that they reflect light in some manner. Therefore, such phenomenon are testable since they affect material reality in some manner.

Paranormal claims take various forms: ESP, physic powers, telekinetics, dowsing, various forms of magic, demons intervening in our lives, power of thought on the material universe, near-death experiences, reincarnation, a deity affecting the material world via supernatural means, voodoo, out-of-body experiences, prediction, crop circles, the existence of a soul, extraterrestrials, etc, etc. There's many I'm forgetting.

And none of them have ever been corroborated by a repeatable scientific test. Ever. I'd be excited to hear an opinion to the contrary. Or rather, not an opinion but a reputable study that claims otherwise. Because the only 'evidence' for such phenomenon comes from those stand to benefit from their existence. And make no mistake, belief in the paranormal and its psuedo-scientific offshoots account for hundreds of millions of dollars each year for those who exploit such beliefs in the general public.

The only evidence remains anecdotal. That which has been studied in some manner has been thoroughly debunked (various psychics, for example, among countless others). And anecdotes aren't evidence, and are unreliable as anything but amusing stories.

So could such things exist? Sure. But there's no good reason to think they do.

uknow_me72
So just what if? If you believe in God you believe in Angel's and Demons.

You heard of warlocks and witches before also, you heard of them making deals with them and using them for magic purposes.

Personal testamonys of various people have angels talk to them or demons, so why can't they be real. Is it you just don't know about them.

If you look at any off the occult work they can tell you about all the other magic and realms but none of them mention anything about the spiritual world. That is what the key is, and that is the entire existence of the world.

They don't tell you that cancer is a demon, they don't tell you that those voices in your head are other idenity's. These things are still there are you are available to acknowledge them because we are still in heaven.


oh wait those are ghost, they are unknown, we don't know much about them.... thats what they say.

Gumachi
I believe they exist. They had sex with Earthly Women causing them to have Giant children. There are ones who rebelled against God(Fallen Angels)and the ones who are in the Abyss(Demons)who will be released(200,000,000 of them). Demons can enter inside and outside of men bodies(but they can be cast out).

inimalist
Originally posted by Digi
prediction,

lol, you're going to hate me for nit picking, but...

Actually, I get what you are going for, however, calling it "prediction" as opposed to something like "precognition" might confuse it with some of the nearly paranormal things the brain is capable of doing.

The ability of humans to predict the outcome of events is uncanny. Without getting into too much depth, it is because of our ability to predict the sensory consequences to our actions that master boxers or martial artists are able to dodge blows in less time than it would take for them to process the attack through their visual system.

Wild Shadow
Originally posted by Gumachi
I believe they exist. They had sex with Earthly Women causing them to have Giant children. There are ones who rebelled against God(Fallen Angels)and the ones who are in the Abyss(Demons)who will be released(200,000,000 of them). Demons can enter inside and outside of men bodies(but they can be cast out).


where are the bones and evidence of the nephilim?..

i assume you are refering to the book of enoch

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
where are the bones and evidence of the nephilim?..

i assume you are refering to the book of enoch

The giants are in Genesis too. Their bones look like bone shaped rocks nowadays.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The giants are in Genesis too. Their bones look like bone shaped rocks nowadays.

Dinosaurs?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Dinosaurs?

MOUNTAINS!!!

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
MOUNTAINS!!!

eek! Well mountains are all over the place. Why didn't we notice before? big grin

Newjak
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
the "all" generalization keeps me from believing you .... sorry

i remember seeing a video about hunted train tracks where a bus full of children died.. ppl put a car in the middle of the tracks covered with baby powder. the car slowly moved up hill without having the engine on..
the car was examined and it had, hand prints all over the back of the wind shields bumper the size of children hands...

not saying it is real because i wasn't there but it makes me wonder.. I know the video you speak of.

About people who would park before the train track and set their cars in neutral. Then the cars would move over the train tracks on what looks like completely flat ground. People would then put baby powder on the back to reveal hand prints.

The show eventually goes unto to prove that the supposedly flat ground is actually at a slight, misleading angle that is just enough to allow gravity to move the stationary car.

As to the hands it was shown that all the baby powder revealed was the oil residue from people that had put their hands on the cars before. Cause you know people are always putting their hands across cars.


As to the question of this thread I do believe in forces we can not possibly begin to comprehend to even begin to test for.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Newjak
I know the video you speak of.

About people who would park before the train track and set their cars in neutral. Then the cars would move over the train tracks on what looks like completely flat ground. People would then put baby powder on the back to reveal hand prints.

The show eventually goes unto to prove that the supposedly flat ground is actually at a slight, misleading angle that is just enough to allow gravity to move the stationary car.

As to the hands it was shown that all the baby powder revealed was the oil residue from people that had put their hands on the cars before. Cause you know people are always putting their hands across cars.


As to the question of this thread I do believe in forces we can not possibly begin to comprehend to even begin to test for.

Dark matter and dark energy. wink

Newjak
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Dark matter and dark energy. wink Truly they are the demons. They even have dark in their names. stick out tongue

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Newjak
Truly they are the demons. They even have dark in their names. stick out tongue

eek! Evil Matter. laughing

Newjak
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
eek! Evil Matter. laughing shifty

Mindship
The psychological ones.

Digi
Originally posted by inimalist
lol, you're going to hate me for nit picking, but...

Actually, I get what you are going for, however, calling it "prediction" as opposed to something like "precognition" might confuse it with some of the nearly paranormal things the brain is capable of doing.

The ability of humans to predict the outcome of events is uncanny. Without getting into too much depth, it is because of our ability to predict the sensory consequences to our actions that master boxers or martial artists are able to dodge blows in less time than it would take for them to process the attack through their visual system.

Clearly I meant precognition. Nit-picky d*ck.

stick out tongue

Originally posted by uknow_me72
So just what if? If you believe in God you believe in Angel's and Demons.

You heard of warlocks and witches before also, you heard of them making deals with them and using them for magic purposes.

Personal testamonys of various people have angels talk to them or demons, so why can't they be real. Is it you just don't know about them.

If you look at any off the occult work they can tell you about all the other magic and realms but none of them mention anything about the spiritual world. That is what the key is, and that is the entire existence of the world.

They don't tell you that cancer is a demon, they don't tell you that those voices in your head are other idenity's. These things are still there are you are available to acknowledge them because we are still in heaven.


oh wait those are ghost, they are unknown, we don't know much about them.... thats what they say.

Or one simply doesn't believe in any of that junk. There, problem solved.

happy

Btw, "If this, then that" statements rarely work well with religion, and also requires evidence for the "this" first, before anything can logically follow from it.

Allankles
I'd like to believe there are angels and demons because that would mean we're not alone in this great big universe.

I've heard and read of eye witness accounts of demon possession and I've heard the logical scientific rebuttals to these accounts.

It doesn't really matter at the end of the day there is much that science can't explain and though religion seems to have all the answers, believing those answers demands a greater effort on our part than observing evidence would.

Reminds me of that quote by Jesus in the New Testament "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

Digi
Originally posted by Allankles
I'd like to believe there are angels and demons because that would mean we're not alone in this great big universe.

I've heard and read of eye witness accounts of demon possession and I've heard the logical scientific rebuttals to these accounts.

It doesn't really matter at the end of the day there is much that science can't explain and though religion seems to have all the answers, believing those answers demands a greater effort on our part than observing evidence would.

Reminds me of that quote by Jesus in the New Testament "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

Which is a handy phrase for a religion that offers no evidence for itself.

roll eyes (sarcastic)

Most theistic traditions have some similar doctrine or saying, because utterly blind faith is needed to accept any of it.

Saying that there's a lot science can't explain doesn't really cut it either. The amount of material where that saying still applies is actually rather small, and dwindling yearly. And saying that it can't explain everything doesn't make an alternative opinion true simply because it's different.

In other words, you can believe if you want to. But there still isn't a good reason to do so.

Final Blaxican
Sure there is.

Symmetric Chaos
No, there really isn't. You just lose nothing by believing.

Red Nemesis
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Dark matter and dark energy. wink

Uhh, Dark Matter can be tested for. It is a scientific concept, and so has proof (mostly observational conjecture at the moment) supporting the idea.

I have no idea what Dark Energy is/how it was proposed. My ignorance isn't a good enough reason to declare it unknowable though.


If something can be observed, then it can be tested. If something can't be observed (by instruments or the naked eye (or, I suppose, through its effects on other matter)) then there is no reason to suspect it exists.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
If something can be observed, then it can be tested. If something can't be observed (by instruments or the naked eye (or, I suppose, through its effects on other matter)) then there is no reason to suspect it exists.

Mathematics: The Ancient Conspiracy

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Digi
Which is a handy phrase for a religion that offers no evidence for itself.

roll eyes (sarcastic)

Most theistic traditions have some similar doctrine or saying, because utterly blind faith is needed to accept any of it.

Saying that there's a lot science can't explain doesn't really cut it either. The amount of material where that saying still applies is actually rather small, and dwindling yearly. And saying that it can't explain everything doesn't make an alternative opinion true simply because it's different.

In other words, you can believe if you want to. But there still isn't a good reason to do so.

I disagree. What you gain from religion is an evolutionary advantage. Remember the only reason religion exists is because those who believed in religion where able to survive and have children. In the past, religion was able to give people something that they needed to survive. I think we need to control and change religion to better meet the needs of the modern world.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I disagree. What you gain from religion is an evolutionary advantage. Remember the only reason religion exists is because those who believed in religion where able to survive and have children. In the past, religion was able to give people something that they needed to survive. I think we need to control and change religion to better meet the needs of the modern world.

"You can believe whatever you want, as long as I say it's okay."

Wild Shadow
wow... may i continue live by your grace?........ smile

Digi
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I disagree. What you gain from religion is an evolutionary advantage. Remember the only reason religion exists is because those who believed in religion where able to survive and have children. In the past, religion was able to give people something that they needed to survive. I think we need to control and change religion to better meet the needs of the modern world.

When I said there wasn't a good reason to believe, I was talking about from a logical perspective of belief vs. non-belief. A strictly academic analysis of it, speaking to the utter lack of evidence for it. But if we begin to include societal affects of such beliefs, there probably IS an advantage to being theistic (and Christian) in general. An unfortunate, but unavoidable, fact of our world. So sure, we're in agreement there. I should've been more specific.

As for the specific belief of demons intervening in our lives, there's no good reason to believe in them for ANY reason: societal, logical, or otherwise.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
wow... may i continue live by your grace?........ smile

It was in quotations....thus, a quote instead of a personal opinion. Probably sarcastic too.

Digi
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No, there really isn't. You just lose nothing by believing.

thumb up

...except, perhaps, the ability to discern probable conclusions from conjecture through critical thinking.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Digi
thumb up

...except, perhaps, the ability to discern probable conclusions from conjecture through critical thinking.

No, it's a single belief. It has no effect on your other beliefs or thought processes.

Red Nemesis
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Mathematics: The Ancient Conspiracy

Math isn't a measurable, physical object, now is it? It is a mental construct- an abstract way of dealing with the world we observe.

Bottom line: Math functions like an adjective to the universe- NOT a noun.

Digi
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No, it's a single belief. It has no effect on your other beliefs or thought processes.

I didn't say it did. I said that placing a belief in something with no evidence to support it is a putting aside of one's rational faculties (as I put before, "the ability to discern probable conclusions from conjecture through critical thinking"wink. But it doesn't mean the same trend will follow for other beliefs, though in practice it likely would for most people.

Wild Shadow
ghost hunters evidence...

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=myths&as_sitesearch=youtube.com&hl=en&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv&oi=property_suggestions&resnum=0&ct=property-revision&cd=1#q=ghost%20hunter&hl=en&emb=0

Deja~vu
Originally posted by Mindship
The psychological ones. And the bone and flesh ones.

Allankles
Originally posted by Digi


Saying that there's a lot science can't explain doesn't really cut it either. The amount of material where that saying still applies is actually rather small, and dwindling yearly. And saying that it can't explain everything doesn't make an alternative opinion true simply because it's different.

That's a bold statement. And you would know the percentage of those things science can explain vs those it can't? I look at science as a means to better our functionality in this universe. Looking at the overwhelming cycle of life and existence as we perceive it, there is much that our science doesn't define.

For one: to break down life, its purpose, its nature. The wonder of consciousness itself, outside of the basic bare bones mundane observable processes.

I don't know how broadly you're looking at this. These are things bread-and-butter factual science doesn't explain or can't without addressing larger than life concepts. But meh!

To me Science is the observance of the mundane world, it doesn't address the question "why?".

For me religion has its place in as much as it relates to mortality, morality, clarity of mind and motivation for life. At least as far as Christian doctrine is concerned there's a very strict code that affects the care with which we handle or own lives and a bigger sense how we handle our thought life. Christianity deals with the "why?", it goes beyond social type systems and their needs.

Jack Daniels
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
do you believe in evil angels tampering with the way we live our lives?
well I do believe in demons and I can prove their existence...all I have to do is introduce u to my mother-in-law...lol

Mindship
Originally posted by Digi
I said that placing a belief in something with no evidence to support it is a putting aside of one's rational faculties It may be more accurate to say that some people put aside their rational faculties because they don't know how to use them, ie, they're not versed in critical observation and thinking. Therefore, in building a reality map, it's easier to believe in the absence of empirical evidence.

Newjak
Originally posted by Digi
h
Saying that there's a lot science can't explain doesn't really cut it either. The amount of material where that saying still applies is actually rather small, and dwindling yearly. And saying that it can't explain everything doesn't make an alternative opinion true simply because it's different.
I like to point out the flaw in this statement.

The amount we like to think science can explain is large but what science can actually prove is rather small at the moment.

I mean once you get to astrological sciences it's all based on nominal observations mixed with very, very finite data. From there we make many observations based on that. Astronomy itself is based on the Copernican Theory that we must assume that Universe is a on a macro level uniform. Which as science often points out is a very bad way to go into something or draw conclusions from.



As to what it can not explain dwindling quickly. I'd point out to the old saying for every question answered a thousand more questions are introduced. Which is true because on a daily basis things we think we know are being overturned for new information and data being recorded which in turn raises a hundred more missing pieces to the puzzle we didn't see before.

Originally posted by Digi
I didn't say it did. I said that placing a belief in something with no evidence to support it is a putting aside of one's rational faculties (as I put before, "the ability to discern probable conclusions from conjecture through critical thinking"wink. But it doesn't mean the same trend will follow for other beliefs, though in practice it likely would for most people. And what exactly is the point in this?

It isn't like I care if I choose not to engage in a realistic, "rational" look on everything in my life. Neither does it in anyway take away from my ability to be rational, nor should it be held against me.

So again, what is the point of pointing it out?

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Digi
When I said there wasn't a good reason to believe, I was talking about from a logical perspective of belief vs. non-belief. A strictly academic analysis of it, speaking to the utter lack of evidence for it. But if we begin to include societal affects of such beliefs, there probably IS an advantage to being theistic (and Christian) in general. An unfortunate, but unavoidable, fact of our world. So sure, we're in agreement there. I should've been more specific...

No, thank you for giving me the opportunity to rant on my fav subject.

big grin

Deano
the ones the ancients call demons are nothinf more than other dimensional entitys. they dont like us. the elite today still worship these entitys, especially at bohemian grove

inimalist
lol

show of hands, who thinks science proves things?

Newjak
*raises hand*

inimalist
hardly surprising

long story short, it doesn't.

Newjak
Originally posted by inimalist
hardly surprising

long story short, it doesn't. What do you mean by hardly surprising?

And what do you mean by proves things to begin with?

inimalist
Originally posted by Newjak
What do you mean by hardly surprising?

people critical of "scientific worldviews" rarely understand the scientific method or natural philosophy very well. I don't mean this in an insulting way, just that I was correct in my assumption, go me

Originally posted by Newjak
And what do you mean by proves things to begin with?

is the purpose of science to prove what is true? does science know truth? does it get us closer to truth?

what is the purpose of the scientific method?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by inimalist
lol

show of hands, who thinks science proves things?

*doesn't raise hand*

shifty

Newjak
Originally posted by inimalist
people critical of "scientific worldviews" rarely understand the scientific method or natural philosophy very well. I don't mean this in an insulting way, just that I was correct in my assumption, go me



is the purpose of science to prove what is true? does science know truth? does it get us closer to truth?

what is the purpose of the scientific method? Isn't the scientific world supposed to be critical of its own worldviews? I fairly see what assumptions could be attained from me simply stating what scientific community does to itself. That is to be cynical of everything and objective to anything and everything other than what is testable.


And no the purpose of Science is not to be used to form a basis of someone's own belief systems. In fact that has led to corruption of true scientific progress such as people believing the world is flat.

No Science has no "purpose" in that sense. Science in and of itself is simply a means in which we use to observe the world to help enrich our understanding of it as is.

And it is pretty much our only reliable, rational way of going about it.

As truth no science is not about finding truth. some would say it is only a mechanism used to help find out what already was happening but lacked the ability to observe before.

inimalist
Originally posted by Newjak
Isn't the scientific world supposed to be critical of its own worldviews?

absolutely

I was more taking a shot at you being critical of something you don't necessarily understand. I wasn't trying to be mean, its just, science doesn't do a good job with PR.

Originally posted by Newjak
I fairly see what assumptions could be attained from me simply stating what scientific community does to itself. That is to be cynical of everything and objective to anything and everything other than what is testable.

but other than "you have no way of saying it couldn't", there is no better argument to assume anything that cannot be measured now, or at some time in the future, has any effect on the universe.

Originally posted by Newjak
And no the purpose of Science is not to be used to form a basis of someone's own belief systems.

indeed, as science is a methodology for making predictions. Materialism, determinism and other natural philosophies from which science as a method was born and is constantly being shaped, however, can be, and have been rather effective at eliminating human suffering and promoting human understanding.

Originally posted by Newjak
In fact that has led to corruption of true scientific progress such as people believing the world is flat.

science has maybe legitimately existed for 200 years, long after people knew the world wasn't flat...

other than that can you elaborate on what you mean?

Originally posted by Newjak
No Science has no "purpose" in that sense. Science in and of itself is simply a means in which we use to observe the world to help enrich our understanding of it as is.

And it is pretty much our only reliable, rational way of going about it.

we agree, though I would point out, science does have a literal purpose.

As we understand it currently, science is about making predictions with certain levels of probable accuracy upon which research programmes (many, complimentary experiments) can be built to form models of how things work.

Originally posted by Newjak
As truth no science is not about finding truth.

indeed. There is no way to ever know if a scientific model represents what actually occurs in the universe, just how accurate it is at describing the results of systemic observation.

Originally posted by Newjak
some would say it is only a mechanism used to help find out what already was happening but lacked the ability to observe before.

i wouldn't though

Newjak
Originally posted by inimalist
absolutely

I was more taking a shot at you being critical of something you don't necessarily understand. I wasn't trying to be mean, its just, science doesn't do a good job with PR.


What didn't I understand?

Originally posted by inimalist

but other than "you have no way of saying it couldn't", there is no better argument to assume anything that cannot be measured now, or at some time in the future, has any effect on the universe.

you don't have to assume it has an effect but one must and is often documented in Science Research journals the possibilities of exceptions to anything.

Originally posted by inimalist

indeed, as science is a methodology for making predictions. Materialism, determinism and other natural philosophies from which science as a method was born and is constantly being shaped, however, can be, and have been rather effective at eliminating human suffering and promoting human understanding.
I agree

Originally posted by inimalist

science has maybe legitimately existed for 200 years, long after people knew the world wasn't flat...

other than that can you elaborate on what you mean?

What I meant was that people have in the past allowed their personal beliefs to subjugate and corrupt their work. I was using idea of a flat earth being believed for so long because it is a very famous example.

Of course I don't mean just religious views, I mean almost any personal beliefs.

Originally posted by inimalist

we agree, though I would point out, science does have a literal purpose.

As we understand it currently, science is about making predictions with certain levels of probable accuracy upon which research programmes (many, complimentary experiments) can be built to form models of how things work.
True

Originally posted by inimalist

indeed. There is no way to ever know if a scientific model represents what actually occurs in the universe, just how accurate it is at describing the results of systemic observation.
I agree

Originally posted by inimalist

i wouldn't though Ok

Red Nemesis
you don't have to assume it has an effect but one must and is often documented in Science Research journals the possibilities of exceptions to anything.


From your response to inimalist you clearly don't get it yet. You say first that "one does not have to assume it has an effect" but then go on to say that "one must" and that there are "exceptions to anything." By considering these parts I can only conclude that your position is that because there are exceptions to almost all rules, there must be an exception to this rule. Please tell me that I misunderstood you. Extrapolating Demons out of uncertainty is not the decision you want to make... Is it?

Digi
Seems I stirred an unintentional sh*tstorm. Anyway, on with it:

Originally posted by Allankles
That's a bold statement. And you would know the percentage of those things science can explain vs those it can't? I look at science as a means to better our functionality in this universe. Looking at the overwhelming cycle of life and existence as we perceive it, there is much that our science doesn't define.

For one: to break down life, its purpose, its nature. The wonder of consciousness itself, outside of the basic bare bones mundane observable processes.

I don't know how broadly you're looking at this. These are things bread-and-butter factual science doesn't explain or can't without addressing larger than life concepts. But meh!

To me Science is the observance of the mundane world, it doesn't address the question "why?".

For me religion has its place in as much as it relates to mortality, morality, clarity of mind and motivation for life. At least as far as Christian doctrine is concerned there's a very strict code that affects the care with which we handle or own lives and a bigger sense how we handle our thought life. Christianity deals with the "why?", it goes beyond social type systems and their needs.

Doesn't refute my point, that it doesn't make a belief in demons rational simply because it doesn't fall within the observable universe. Of course religion tries to answer the "whys" of the world. But if it offers no evidence for the supposed basis of those answers, the answers themselves are arbitrary. Transempirical phenomenon are not testable. But the supposed affects of those forces upon the world (prayers, angels, demons, visions, psychics, ghosts, dousing, precognition, contact with the dead, miracles, etc. etc.) certainly are testable, which includes any popular theistic religion.

I also said that we know a lot and the information we don't know is dwindling. Pointing out that we don't know everything doesn't refute those statements. It just means there are still things to study. And at the risk of sidetracking us, "the overwhelming cycle of life" is neatly explained through evolution. If you disagree, however, take it to an appropriate thread.

Originally posted by Mindship
It may be more accurate to say that some people put aside their rational faculties because they don't know how to use them, ie, they're not versed in critical observation and thinking. Therefore, in building a reality map, it's easier to believe in the absence of empirical evidence.

True, which is a good alternative way of viewing my point.

Originally posted by Newjak
I like to point out the flaw in this statement.

The amount we like to think science can explain is large but what science can actually prove is rather small at the moment.

I mean once you get to astrological sciences it's all based on nominal observations mixed with very, very finite data. From there we make many observations based on that. Astronomy itself is based on the Copernican Theory that we must assume that Universe is a on a macro level uniform. Which as science often points out is a very bad way to go into something or draw conclusions from.

We can't "prove" anything, so let's throw that out the door. Now look at what we knew 100 years ago compared to today? Then observe the number of tests that support a belief in the paranormal, which would need to have some quantifiable affect on reality to be perceived by humans. There are none. My point stands.

Originally posted by Newjak
As to what it can not explain dwindling quickly. I'd point out to the old saying for every question answered a thousand more questions are introduced. Which is true because on a daily basis things we think we know are being overturned for new information and data being recorded which in turn raises a hundred more missing pieces to the puzzle we didn't see before.

Thus the beauty of science: it's provisional, not dogmatic.

But sometimes theories stick. The thousand more questions thing is just a cliche phrase. We know a lot more than we once did, with less holes in our knowledge. No one's saying we know everything, but we're always working toward it.

Originally posted by Newjak
And what exactly is the point in this?

It isn't like I care if I choose not to engage in a realistic, "rational" look on everything in my life. Neither does it in anyway take away from my ability to be rational, nor should it be held against me.

So again, what is the point of pointing it out?

Well for one, it wasn't directed at you specifically, but was a response to shakya's protests. Taken out of context, it sounds a bit more vitriolic than intended.

I simply pointed out that to believe in something with no discernible evidence for it is rather absurd. Shakya then pointed out that there's societal and evolutionary advantages to certain beliefs, with thus makes them rational to believe in, but for different reasons. I agree with that wholeheartedly.

Originally posted by inimalist
lol

show of hands, who thinks science proves things?

lol. Yes yes, of course. I'm likely the culprit here (or one of a few, since I don't think I used that specific phrase), but we don't always have to be so exacting, yes? I think that the vast majority of us are aware that using "science" as an anthropomorphic giver of knowledge is simply shorthand for talking about studies and tests that evaluate, corroborate, and/or refute theories. If I've said anything specific that's objectionable other than this insertion, please let me know. Until then, please allow me to imagine Science as an old man with a flowing white beard.

wink

Newjak
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
you don't have to assume it has an effect but one must and is often documented in Science Research journals the possibilities of exceptions to anything.


From your response to inimalist you clearly don't get it yet. You say first that "one does not have to assume it has an effect" but then go on to say that "one must" and that there are "exceptions to anything." By considering these parts I can only conclude that your position is that because there are exceptions to almost all rules, there must be an exception to this rule. Please tell me that I misunderstood you. Extrapolating Demons out of uncertainty is not the decision you want to make... Is it? I think you misunderstood quite a bit.

I'm saying that yes science won't assume something will have an effect that can not be measured or tested at the moment.

But as with anything holes are bound to exist. The possibilities of abnormal outcomes are known to creep up.

What I said was that most scientific research will in fact document these exceptions even if they can not be tested.

The point being that the Scientific Community is always noting the limits of itself. Just because something can not be tested for doesn't mean that it won't be taken into account.

Or to better clear it up. Scientist don't assume that these untestable things undermine the current doctrine at the moment, but that doesn't mean the cases themselves aren't hidden. It's like a computer program. As long as everything goes according to plan everything is fine but we still want to be able to account for the possibility of exceptions.... just in case.

The comment itself had nothing to do with Demons only with inimalist's particular comment about how nothing that can not be tested or measured has an effect on the Universe.

Wild Shadow
can any explain the covers on the bed moving on its own?

first three min. of ghost hunters evidence

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=myths&as_sitesearch=youtube.com&hl=en&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv&oi=property_suggestions&resnum=0&ct=property-revision&cd=1#q=ghost%20hunter&hl=en&emb=0

Red Nemesis
Why did you link to a video about 'global health?'

It was fascinating, but it doesn't really apply to the topic- does it?

Wild Shadow
you have to look next to the video which is why i gave the name of the video for ppl to load it.. smile

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
can any explain the covers on the bed moving on its own?

A light breeze.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=hMenB9Ywh2Q

Wild Shadow
did you watch the video ghost hunter mutiple evidence prt 1 ?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
did you watch the video ghost hunter mutiple evidence prt 1 ?

Nope. Did you watch my video? 313

Wild Shadow
yup.. plan on watching it again...

the ghost hunter evidence is in the 1st few minutes should watch it and tell me what u thing

Symmetric Chaos
Okay, new theory. The dude lying in the bed . . . may have had something to do with it. I postulate he used to power of his mind to tug on the sheets via some manner of dexterous appendage native to his body.

no expression Easiest. Debunking. Ever.

Wild Shadow
hmm...... with his grotch is that what u are saying?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
hmm...... with his grotch is that what u are saying?

We call it a leg where I come from.

The only one that impresses me is the man who appears out of no where. Though, that's probably just a person who has used his mind to exploit the fault lines of reality in order to travel instantly through space and time.

See, there's a perfectly reasonable explanation for everything.

Wild Shadow
i sometimes thing it could be temporal displacement that we happen to see through thin layers of reality...

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i sometimes thing it could be temporal displacement that we happen to see through thin layers of reality...

Really? I usually blame it on grainy black and white viedography. You'll notice that no one has ever produced images of the paranormal in full color with highdef equipment.

Wild Shadow
what about this one?


poltergiest activity debunked

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=poltergeist+activity&www_google_domain=www.google.com&hl=en&emb=0&aq=1&oq=polter#q=poltergeist%20activity&www_google_domain=www.google.com&hl=en&emb=0&aq=1&oq=polter&start=10

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
what about this one?


poltergiest activity debunked

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=poltergeist+activity&www_google_domain=www.google.com&hl=en&emb=0&aq=1&oq=polter#q=poltergeist%20activity&www_google_domain=www.google.com&hl=en&emb=0&aq=1&oq=polter&start=10

His vacuum is possessed the eldritch soul of Hitler. Technically not a ghost but very very creepy.

I have no good explanation for it. However, considering we have to take this guy's word for it (and he seems to have a habit of making those videos) I wouldn't rule out a hoax entirely.

Wild Shadow
i was talking about poltergiest activity debunked the one in the construction site,, not the guy with his dogs i thinks his are all fake

Grand-Moff-Gav
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i was talking about poltergiest activity debunked the one in the construction site,, not the guy with his dogs i thinks his are all fake

Its funny how he comes home from work in ripped jeans and a blue t-shirt....I wonder what his job is....

that and if his house was that haunted...would he be sleeping in it?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i was talking about poltergiest activity debunked the one in the construction site,, not the guy with his dogs i thinks his are all fake

Why don't you link to the video you want people to watch?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
that and if his house was that haunted...would he be sleeping in it?

Ghost molestation fetish.

Deja~vu
I know that there are things that we don't quite fully understand, but I would put them in the category of negative and positive energies. Also, they draw on your own energy of negatives and positives. What you put out, you draw to yourself.

Red Nemesis
Would you care to describe these energies? Explain how they work? Are they thus far undetected or predicted particles? What evidence do you have for their existence? How did you come to this 'belief?'


What sort of test would allow us to measure these "energies?" What would these "energies" mean?

Classic NES
I believe in "Daimonic" forces.

Wild Shadow
how explain

Classic NES
You moved on to another thread too. laughing

Back on topic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daimonic

Wild Shadow
i like ppl with their thoughts and opinions....

not bots or parrots........


i see forgot all about daimonic

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.