And yet without the backdrop of perfection, what would hold things together? Why doesn't the Universe begin to unravel right before our very eyes. There must be something consistent and solid (in the absolute sense) to hold the Universe together. And it must be perfect in every account, otherwise we wouldn't be here.

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

And yet where is the free will, if we aren't allowed to disagree? Why is it that I am allowed to disagree with you? Certainly if everyone agreed with you, the world would be awfully deterministic now wouldn't it? Why? Because nothing would ever change. And there's your answer to free will versus determinism right there.

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

Why must that be? Because you would feel uncomfortable if it there weren't? I am sorry, Iacchy, but your persistant explantion that it must be so is completely unconvincing.

Like Diggy and you both said, none of us is perfect (and I argue that perfection does not exist), but even if there were something perfect, how could imperfect beings such as ourselves know it? Unless you were yourself perfect, you could never spot the flaws in an imperfect thing. Therefore, you, an imperfect being, cannot know whether or not this perfect being exists.

Oh yeah. What do you mean by "solid". Tangible? Well evidenced? Trustworthy? I've certainly never seen any physical evidence of God.

It looks like you've got your work cut out for you. Iacchus isn't the only "imperfect" person in the world so why don't you give him a break and let some of the other "imperfect" people in the world pick up some of the slack? None of us will ever be perfect but the best anyone can do is try to do our best in the present moment.

Do you mean completely in the absolute sense? Hmm ...

How do we know we're not perfect, unless there was something more perfect than ourselves to highlight this fact?

Well, if the Universe isn't 15 billion years old (or, there abouts), I guess I could be mistaken?

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

Simply because Iacchy is the one making statements such as this:Now that's a pretty powerful statement, wouldn't you say Peggy? It asserts a knowledge on the makeup of the universe.

Now perhaps I should, as you seem to be suggesting, merely shrug and say, "that's your opinion". Maybe that would be less confrontatory, but it would do nothing to advance discussion. In order to have any sort of meaningful exchange of ideas, I must comment on the ideas presented. Surely you see that.

Now I understand your feeling that Iacchus is being "picked on". Well, you're right. But the reason he is being picked on is because of his proclivity for making sweeping, universal statements like the above. If I made such statements, I would fully expect you, Iacchy and Diggy to come down on me like ugly on an ape. (No offense, my fellow apes. It's just an expression.)
Of course none of us will ever be perfect, and of course, we should all strive to be good people, however we define "good". Although, I would add that we also need to strive to make the future a "good" place to be. Iacchy and I agree on this. We are both environmentalists.
You won't know it. You can't know it. It is impossible for you to know that one thing is more (or less) perfect than another, or even if perfection exists unless you know what "perfect" is. (Hint: You don't)LOL. I can think of lots of other scenarios where you might be mistaken.

And what are you saying you don't know anything about the makeup of the universe? If not, then what the hell are you doing lecturing me about it?

Of course!

Hey, there's only one Universe you know.

Sounds to me like you could be describing the perfect jack-ass. Careful now ...

Really? ...

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

As I've said (many times) I claim only to have evidence that some things (in this case, about how the universe is constructed) are true, and I'll have and will continue to present that evidence if asked. But many of the things you assert about how the universe is constructed are just wild speculation, for which you decline to present a single shred of evidence. I think there is a difference in those claims. Don't you?
Good! Then maybe Peggy will stop trying so hard to protect you.

Interesting. In the past, I've heard you claim that other dimensions exist, and like most of your claims, they have no evidence.Iacchy! I'm shocked! Are you trying to flame me? Gosh I really hope so. I'd love a little fun. Probably ought to take it to another thread, though, so people won't be distracted by our game.
Yup. If you like, I'll describe some of the scenarios to you.

The mind is designed to speculate, reason and construct. Are you saying you are only willing to reason about that which has already been constructed? Sounds awfully biased and opinionated to me. Ever hear of the term status quo?

Or, maybe she's just tired of listening to you all the time?

I have never claimed that the Universe wasn't multi-dimensional, because it is.

No, not really, I was just questioning whose notion of perfection we were considering here? But then again, maybe it would be a good idea to start up a flame wars section in the St. Elsewhere fourm? You know, so we don't have to continue to tear each other down in other threads? Will consider it. And who knows, maybe I'll even consider making you the moderator over it, if you behave that is.

Unfortunately however, once you begin to understand what I'm saying, you'll have to start agreeing with me.

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

You have not demonstrated that you know anything at all about the nature of the mind. On what are you basing your comment about its design? Is this another thing you dreamed?I think she takes pity on you. Actually, what you have never claimed is any evidence whatsoever for your notions. It is such a simple request, and you evade, dodge, distract, split threads...If you continue to say unsupportable things in the usual threads, those things will be torn down. Whether you go with them is your choice. You can always learn...Ok, that may be the single funniest thing you have written. Iacchus...many of the things you say, we do understand. You just happen to be wrong. The things we don't understand, we ask about. Maybe one of these times we will get answers.

I do have a mind by the way. And without it, we wouldn't be holding this discussion.

Actually, I think she likes me, but that's another story.

I really don't remember having said anything, to be honest with you. In which case it makes it kind of hard to respond to any of your allegations.

And yet why do I feel innocent of all the charges then? The fact is, I don't remember.

Only because it can't proven under a microscope? I'm afraid not.

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

I admit that I am biased and opinionated. I am biased towards logic and opinionated towards evidence. It is a terrible character flaw. I do love fiction too, but only when the writers are aware that they are writing fiction.
Why yes! Yes I have! A good example would be accepting the word of a 2000 year old philosophical tome over things learned in the last century. Ever hear of the term non sequitur?
Possibly. But if "she" (I'm not really sure about Peggy's sex) was truly tired of repetition, "she" would never be defending you. Either that or Peggy doesn't read all the posts here.
Of course, this universe has at least four dimensions of which we know. Are you suggesting there are others? If so, can you give us some evidence for them? If not, then what makes you think they exist? Of course, if you are saying these dimensions exist in another universe, then you contradict your earlier statement. Not that self contradiction has ever been much of a barrier to your opinions before...
Oh? then I'm curious as to why you invoked the term "jack-ass", which is usually considered an insult.
Oh, flames are for fun, and yes, I'd enjoy one (But beware of making me a moderator. I've never had power before. I don't know what I'd do with it.) But it would not stop me from continuing to offer my honest criticism and/or praise of the things said in other forums. If you think I am posting here as a joke, you are wrong.
Actually, Iacchy, I do understand what you are saying. You have the soul of a poet, a thing which I understand all too intimately. But I also recognize what you are saying as creative, thoughtful, symbolic, metaphorical balderdash. I know, because I have written plenty of it in my time. You can't fool me, Iacchy. I know exactly where you are coming from, because I have been there too. Believe me, it's a bad neighborhood. I advise you to get out as quickly as you can and hitch the next train to Realityville. I'll meet you there at the station.

And yet the reality of your reality is that we are merely illusions. And, that this is all we have to look forward to upon death.

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

Not illusions, Iacchus, but very very real. But yes, death is the end, and I know how much that frightens you, and that explains a lot.

I intend to die one of these days.

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

Not based on anything I've ever seen you write. All of your philosophy here, your last comment to me, and even your signature indicate that you don't really believe in death.

Really, Iacchy, don't be such a fraidy-cat. Live this life, the only one you can be sure of, to the fullest, and when you go, go with class and dignity, not whimpering to some God or other to please let you just go off and start a new reality, or live in Heaven with Jesus, or be reincarnated as another person. Anything but total death!

In response to Gberry --
And how do you know that "perfection" does not exist if you are too imperfect to determine it? How do you know that you or "none of us" are "not" perfect? What are you measuring this by? What are you defining as "perfection" for the sake of this argument, since it is not measured by anything and becomes just a matter of opinion in your way of thinking?

Exactly, and by the same token, you cannot say that we are not perfect then, unless you do not believe in the concept at all, in which case your intellect and ablility to reason and understand is not perfect either, since perfection does not exist.

If you are too imperfect to know this or if perfection does not exist, then you cannot make such statements regarding none of us being perfect. What is a good person?...just your opinion? Then many mass murders are good people too, if someone thinks they are, since we as individuals are the ones defining it. My idea of a "good future" may be different than yours. What would we be striving for and why? It's all a matter of personal values and opinion, if we are to follow your way of thinking, in which there is no universal standard -- only our own. There is no "we" in terms of striving for a good future, since many of us differ in what that means to us. Just because one person thinks that burning the rain forests is a bad thing, doesn't mean it is, since we all have different priorities and opinions on such things....according to what you are saying.


Yep, just as I said above about your way of thinking.
Why? Who says? You? Society? By who's standard is this wrong? You're contradicting yourself, based on your previous quote. Maybe someone else does not think it's wrong, so if there is no universal standard for right and wrong, then it is just your opinion that it's wrong, and you cannot make this statement as a fact.

Say what? How did you arrive at this? Has this been determined to be a fact? It's quite easy to be flawed and see flaws in other imperfect things. Otherwise you could not see Iacchus's flaws? ...unless of course you are perfect, but you said perfection does not exist.



In response to DC --
If perfection does not exist as GB suggested, then neither does imperfection. What is imperfection? The lack of perfection? How can you say that we are imperfect? But I thought she said there is no such thing as perfection. So an imperfect being cannot know the will of God? How do you know that imperfection would translate into every single aspect of understanding? Yes, it's possible to be mistaken, but that doesn't mean that mistakes are a given, based on imperfection.
You cannot accurately "know" what frightens another human being, unless they have honestly told you. Maybe I missed something...did he say this somewhere? Please don't tell me that you're psychic DC? I would not think you would believe in such far out things as that. Also, you are stating "death is the end" as an absolute fact. Is that how you intend it? So, you "KNOW" for absolute certain that this is true? As far as being afraid, if I knew for sure that what you are saying is true, I'd be tempted to slit my throat tomorrow. I'd have ZERO fear of not existing anymore. Why do you assume this is something to be feared? Do you fear it, so you're projecting your own fears onto others? As far as I'm concerned, in many respects this world is as close as we can get to a living hell, though perhaps second to the eternal hell that I believe in merely out of faith. I would have no fear whatsoever in not existing. Atheists love to believe that "fear" of nonexistence is a God-believing person's reason for their faith, but that is pure BS.

Are you suggesting that the kidney donator and the firefighter are "good"? Again, this goes back to the question of who decides what is good. According to the thinking process that you and GB uphold, it's only a matter of opinion. Second, it seems to me that Iacchus was saying that selflessness is a good quality, but he was not saying that humans are not capable of it...only that they are inherently predisposed to extremes of selfishness. I think he is saying that good is manifested in humans when they overcome their egotistical, selfish natures. This could be applied to a firefighter, Mother Teresa, a kidney donator, or other entirely different types of love and humbleness -- take your pick.

Just some food for thought folks.


I personally do very much believe in a universal right and wrong, good and evil.

When you're dead you're dead ... at the very least in the physical sense. In which case any life that we lead in this world is irrelevant. So why the big pretense? Unless of course there's more to this world of dreams and intent than realists would have us believe.

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?

Are you now dictating what living life to the fullest and going with class and dignity means? (Sorry GB, but I just had to speak my mind here.) Perhaps to Iacchus they mean something different than they do to you, so I think he's allowed to live his life to the fullest according to what "the fullest" means to him. If that means believing as he does, then so be it. There is no lack of class and dignity in that.

Thank you very much Epiphany for helping to keep this thread on track! This is what we need around here, those who can point out the contradictions in what others are saying and still maintain a sense of balance ... which, unfortunately I don't always feel up to doing. Thanks again!

__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?