B
Baccarat
Might make an interesting Skeptiko guest:
https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/stev...14/02/10/why-mark-passio-is-full-of-shit/amp/
A musician who thinks the holy grail of the bible is marijuana?
Might make an interesting Skeptiko guest:
https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/stev...14/02/10/why-mark-passio-is-full-of-shit/amp/
Gabriel regularly accuses Alex and I of being anti-religion - while you accuse us of wanting to blend science and religion :)This board is pretty much the merging of Science and Religion, which is a fallacy. Occultism is the father of religion, modern science, chemistry and dozens of other things. This is not a attack on the knowledge you guys carry. I feel like this board is caught in a loophole of redundant topics. "Does PSI exist? "Yes the data is there" "What does that mean for religion".....its like sitting on a merry go round. "What race was Jesus?" "Was Jesus a real person or a sun GOD" Its not productive and its wasting valuable energy. I'm doing my own PSI experiments, and have them documented, I don't need a big lab like Radin or Sheldrake. I simply record my dreams and my experiences. How does PSI work? I don't know the Science about it, it "works" when it wants to it seems. Can I find out how it works? Possibly...through meditation or "trance"
This is just my experience, but I spend so much time thinking about death because my life on Earth is effectively over, so all I have left is the possibility that there's somewhere else to go.Learn to be a good human and stop spending all this time wondering about death
You are anti-religion, and openly so. That's your prerogative. My concerns are nothing to do with your stance on religion, it's the fact you're wilfully uninformed and insist on spreading disinformation at every opportunity. You're prejudiced, and pre-judgement was never more evident than in the Sheldrake podcast. Rupert was stalled from making a point because it didn't fit the preferred view of the interviewer. That's not a big deal, after all Sheldrake was selling a book and all's fair in love and marketing, but it was revealing.Gabriel regularly accuses Alex and I of being anti-religion - while you accuse us of wanting to blend science and religion :)
[Passio] Might make an interesting Skeptiko guest:
Well, of course I had nothing to do with creating the podcast, and for what it is worth, I would have made far less of the issue regarding Rupert's Christianity - mainly because I think pushing people hard in these podcasts rarely generates anything new.You are anti-religion, and openly so. That's your prerogative. My concerns are nothing to do with your stance on religion, it's the fact you're wilfully uninformed and insist on spreading disinformation at every opportunity. You're prejudiced, and pre-judgement was never more evident than in the Sheldrake podcast. Rupert was stalled from making a point because it didn't fit the preferred view of the interviewer. That's not a big deal, after all Sheldrake was selling a book and all's fair in love and marketing, but it was revealing.
I might even manage to persuade Alex to re-target one of the two closed forums to discuss it, but I'd like some evidence that it is possible to achieve some interesting results.
In the first instance, take a thread and expound your thoughts about the occult!
People of widely differing religious and metaphysical conclusions got on perfectly well on this forum. They were united in the things I said, grave doubts about the standard model and a conviction that psi was a real thing. It was you who stated the existence of psi has clear connotations for religious believers. As the religious are really the only people who believed in the non-material nature of reality since the so-called enlightenment, that's a bizarre claim. When psi effects are written in to the scientific literature, sceptics will claim that kind of psi was never a problem for them, it was the woo stuff they had an issue with. They will find a way of elevating the austere disinterest of the laboratory from the dirty business of metaphysics. That's the audience Radin is pursuing, and you want to convince. You're not prepared to accept Catholics (the tradition I know best) accepted the non-material centuries ago, because Catholics have done bad things. On that basis why try to convince scientists, when they are responsible for the atomic bomb and gas chambers?Well, of course I had nothing to do with creating the podcast, and for what it is worth, I would have made far less of the issue regarding Rupert's Christianity - mainly because I think pushing people hard in these podcasts rarely generates anything new.
I do not think I am so much wilfully misinformed about religion, as I simply have a different model as to how religion works.
So I think that if you were to take some of the worst examples of religious people - Muslims recruited into ISIS lets say, and traced their ancestors back a few generations, they would probably all be Muslims, but most of them would be far softer, kinder individuals - not dissimilar from the folk that fill the pews in church!
The problem is that their kind and caring version of Islam still claims to revere their whole collection scripture, even though it really doesn't - just as a Catholic child given a bible can read Leviticus. That means that people can be led astray by others who simply quote their parents' scripture at them! Thus the softer forms of religion may be wonderful, but they contain the seeds for further atrocities.
Is there some wilful ignorance that has contributed to that view - if so, please elaborate.
David
I tried above to explain my views on religion. You don't seem interested in responding to what I wrote, so I suggest we give this up.So far as a forum can be an institution, you are not prepared to accept that anti-religious sentiments are institutionalised in its structure. As no one is pushing religion, the antagonism is all one way. I'm cool with that, but I think we should be told rather than going through the pretence. I'm pissed off with religion even being a topic, but while ever it is I feel justified in calling people on their prejudices in the same way I'd call materialists on theirs
You don't seem able to understand it's another attempt at controlling the narrative. You want things served up in the way you want them, or you suggest "we give this up". These threads are peppered with you offering what you imagine to be well-intentioned advice, but comes across to everyone else as schoolmasterly condescension. This really is about you David, and the manner in which you moderate the forum. I'm sure you spend much of your time fending off dildo advertisements, but that doesn't protect you from criticism. Presenting psi as a favourable alternative to organised religion is dumb on so many levels. As a moderator you should know better than to let your opinions colour your judgement to the extent they do. I'm out.I tried above to explain my views on religion. You don't seem interested in responding to what I wrote, so I suggest we give this up.
David
Actually we got rid of almost all the dildo ads and related rubbish by making newcomers engage in a short discussion with Alex before joining!You don't seem able to understand it's another attempt at controlling the narrative. You want things served up in the way you want them, or you suggest "we give this up". These threads are peppered with you offering what you imagine to be well-intentioned advice, but comes across to everyone else as schoolmasterly condescension. This really is about you David, and the manner in which you moderate the forum. I'm sure you spend much of your time fending off dildo advertisements, but that doesn't protect you from criticism. Presenting psi as a favourable alternative to organised religion is dumb on so many levels. As a moderator you should know better than to let your opinions colour your judgement to the extent they do. I'm out.
OK I know what you mean, but obviously we certainly want keep a civil discussion. I think the real problem is with people who can't accept, even in principle, that there could be a flaw in their point of view (not mentioning names).And this is why I can't stand religion/materialist or people who partake in it. Let's lose the labels and start from the beginning shall we
And this is why I can't stand religion/materialist or people who partake in it. Let's lose the labels and start from the beginning shall we
This is the very problem with the arts as they are now. I've heard this often "good artists copy, great artists steal' and it's such a dismissive approach to creativity. Yes, it's true, if you need to make a buck. But the greatest of artists did not do this, their piece of the weave of creation was utterly unique and that's what made it special, and that's why they died in poverty and always will, b/c the market is not reflective, in any way, of true art.
However, I think your quote has more than a grain of truth, and maybe it wasn't meant to be dismissive. The problem is that those who prize novelty above all else, don't produce anything of real value.This is the very problem with the arts as they are now. I've heard this often "good artists copy, great artists steal' and it's such a dismissive approach to creativity. Yes, it's true, if you need to make a buck. But the greatest of artists did not do this, their piece of the weave of creation was utterly unique and that's what made it special, and that's why they died in poverty and always will, b/c the market is not reflective, in any way, of true art.