Reality is an Emergence

[tapaticmadness]

This is why I am for 'spirituality' [well-being] within the holistic and system approach.

Nope, I have never said religions [all] are evil.
I stated some religions [especially the Abrahamic] are loaded with evil elements that catalyze its 20% of naturally evil prone believers to commit terrible violent and evil acts in the name of their God.

There religions that are overall good, e.g. Buddhism and the likes, but the point is a religion is generally only effective when organized within institutions.
Structured institutions inherently generate loads of scandals and evils by the various types of people therein.
For this reason, I would recommend humanity weaned off all institutional religions in the future [not now] whilst retaining the good principles to add to others for the whole of humanity.

For you religion consists entirely of human things. There are no gods. Thus for you what evil is in religion is of human origin and not because of the presence of evil gods/demons. I obviously disagree.

[tapaticmadness]

Your denial on the grounding of human behavior to DNA [& RNA] is based on ignorance.

Surely you cannot deny all your primal instincts, emotions and crude reasonings are driven by faculties established from the human genetic codes.
Even the formation of the neo-cortex and prefrontal cortex is generated from the human DNA.
What is not DNA driven are only the nurturing elements after birth which is relatively insignificant to the 'nature' elements.

The 20% is a very conservative estimate.
I define 'evil' as any human propensity, thought and act that is net-negative to the well being of the individual[s] and thus to humanity.
Lying is an evil act, albeit with a very low degree of evilness.

• The study, published in the journal's June issue, found that 60 percent of people lied at least once during a 10-minute conversation and told an average of two to three lies.
  https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases ... 061002.php

It is very obvious, the other lower range of evil e.g. stealing, corruption, petty crimes, are committed by more than 50% of people.

Therefore my 20% is very conservative to cover those higher degree evil acts from serious violence, crimes, rapes, to the highest mass rapes, genocides, and the likes.

One point is, I always maintain an above average intellectual integrity and you can assume all my claims will be substantiated with evidences and arguments. I don't produce the detailed supporting evidence to save time and effort.
I am not that stupid [disgraceful for me] to simply pick subjective opinions based on feelings and from the air, which on the other hand you are more prone to do.

Believing all that, how can you still say that you are not a materialist?

Phew.. how many times already?
Why do you keep insisting I am a materialist [philosophical]?

Note this again:

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism that holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental states and consciousness, are results of material interactions. According to philosophical materialism, mind and consciousness are by-products or epiphenomena of material processes (such as the biochemistry of the human brain and nervous system), without which they cannot exist.

This concept [of Materialism] directly contrasts with idealism, where mind and consciousness are first-order realities to which matter is subject and material interactions are secondary.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism

Hope you get it this time.

I am not a philosophical materialist.

How can you at one and the same time believe that matter is subject to mind and that material interactions are secondary, and also believe that DNA has formed our brain in a certain way and we act and feel according to that? Do you have cognitive dissonance or what?

[Veritas Aequitas]

This is why I am for 'spirituality' [well-being] within the holistic and system approach.

Nope, I have never said religions [all] are evil.
I stated some religions [especially the Abrahamic] are loaded with evil elements that catalyze its 20% of naturally evil prone believers to commit terrible violent and evil acts in the name of their God.

There religions that are overall good, e.g. Buddhism and the likes, but the point is a religion is generally only effective when organized within institutions.
Structured institutions inherently generate loads of scandals and evils by the various types of people therein.
For this reason, I would recommend humanity weaned off all institutional religions in the future [not now] whilst retaining the good principles to add to others for the whole of humanity.

For you religion consists entirely of human things. There are no gods. Thus for you what evil is in religion is of human origin and not because of the presence of evil gods/demons. I obviously disagree.

Yes, religion is grounded and tied entirely to human things.

How can there be God or gods when I have proven God is an impossibility to be real.
Note my argument here;
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

You have the wrong conception of evil.
Note I added this to the last post, i.e. the Demons are in you, presumably the terrible ones are dormant while the active ones are benign;

• Re Religion, God and Evil,
  It would be more efficient for you to 'Know Thyself' in terms of the existential crisis [e.g. Angst re Heidegger, Kierkegaard] and how the potential for Evil is embedded inherently within you as any human being via the DNA. This existential crisis is the root cause of religions and God[s].
  
  The 'potential for Evil' within every person cages all the terrible Demons waiting to be unleashed while in the natural evil prone, these Demons are already active waiting or already had wrought evil all over the world since humans emerged.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Believing all that, how can you still say that you are not a materialist?

Phew.. how many times already?
Why do you keep insisting I am a materialist [philosophical]?

Note this again:

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism that holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental states and consciousness, are results of material interactions. According to philosophical materialism, mind and consciousness are by-products or epiphenomena of material processes (such as the biochemistry of the human brain and nervous system), without which they cannot exist.

This concept [of Materialism] directly contrasts with idealism, where mind and consciousness are first-order realities to which matter is subject and material interactions are secondary.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism

Hope you get it this time.

I am not a philosophical materialist.

How can you at one and the same time believe that matter is subject to mind and that material interactions are secondary, and also believe that DNA has formed our brain in a certain way and we act and feel according to that? Do you have cognitive dissonance or what?

Why not?
It is not a contradiction to believe in P and not-p at the same time BUT not in the same sense.

• 1. Matter is subject to mind and that material interactions are secondary
  
  2. DNA has formed our brain in a certain way and we act and feel according to that?

Both 1 and 2 are facts.
Where is the issue then?

[tapaticmadness]

Yes, religion is grounded and tied entirely to human things.

How can there be God or gods when I have proven God is an impossibility to be real.
Note my argument here;
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

You have the wrong conception of evil.
Note I added this to the last post, i.e. the Demons are in you, presumably the terrible ones are dormant while the active ones are benign;

• Re Religion, God and Evil,
  It would be more efficient for you to 'Know Thyself' in terms of the existential crisis [e.g. Angst re Heidegger, Kierkegaard] and how the potential for Evil is embedded inherently within you as any human being via the DNA. This existential crisis is the root cause of religions and God[s].

OK, this argument is going nowhere so I will deviate from that and speak about our existential crisis. As I see it the greatest cause of Angst among us now is information overload. There is no way we can make our way through all the videos and printed matter out there. It's too much. And it just keeps coming. More and more. What to do?

I have written a lot. Over much. No one is going to read all that. Still, what I have written is basically one and the same idea expressed in an endless number of ways. To read a small part of what I have written is to have read it all. And to get the main idea is to see that the idea itself is other than any of it many expressions. I always think of Kosuth's Three Chairs - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_and_Three_Chairs

[Veritas Aequitas]

Yes, religion is grounded and tied entirely to human things.

How can there be God or gods when I have proven God is an impossibility to be real.
Note my argument here;
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

You have the wrong conception of evil.
Note I added this to the last post, i.e. the Demons are in you, presumably the terrible ones are dormant while the active ones are benign;

• Re Religion, God and Evil,
  It would be more efficient for you to 'Know Thyself' in terms of the existential crisis [e.g. Angst re Heidegger, Kierkegaard] and how the potential for Evil is embedded inherently within you as any human being via the DNA. This existential crisis is the root cause of religions and God[s].

OK, this argument is going nowhere so I will deviate from that and speak about our existential crisis. As I see it the greatest cause of Angst among us now is information overload. There is no way we can make our way through all the videos and printed matter out there. It's too much. And it just keeps coming. More and more. What to do?

Re Information overload, that is merely a concern and uneasiness, there is no direct link to an existential threat.

The 'angst' I referred to is more towards 'existential angst'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angst

Heidegger and Kierkegaard angst is related to anxiety to fear and ultimately to the subliminal fear of the existential threat inevitable mortality.

I have written a lot. Over much. No one is going to read all that. Still, what I have written is basically one and the same idea expressed in an endless number of ways. To read a small part of what I have written is to have read it all. And to get the main idea is to see that the idea itself is other than any of it many expressions. I always think of Kosuth's Three Chairs - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_and_Three_Chairs

The conceptual art approach like that of poetry is beating around the bush with the faculty of intuition.
Surely the "truth" will strike some people but there is no consistency to it.

Rather than conceptual art, philosophy-proper using its various tools is more objective in getting to what is the deeper and more refined truth where the 'eureka' [epiphany] moment can be more orgasmic.

[tapaticmadness]

Yes, religion is grounded and tied entirely to human things.

How can there be God or gods when I have proven God is an impossibility to be real.
Note my argument here;
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24704

You have the wrong conception of evil.
Note I added this to the last post, i.e. the Demons are in you, presumably the terrible ones are dormant while the active ones are benign;

• Re Religion, God and Evil,
  It would be more efficient for you to 'Know Thyself' in terms of the existential crisis [e.g. Angst re Heidegger, Kierkegaard] and how the potential for Evil is embedded inherently within you as any human being via the DNA. This existential crisis is the root cause of religions and God[s].

OK, this argument is going nowhere so I will deviate from that and speak about our existential crisis. As I see it the greatest cause of Angst among us now is information overload. There is no way we can make our way through all the videos and printed matter out there. It's too much. And it just keeps coming. More and more. What to do?

Re Information overload, that is merely a concern and uneasiness, there is no direct link to an existential threat.

The 'angst' I referred to is more towards 'existential angst'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angst

Heidegger and Kierkegaard angst is related to anxiety to fear and ultimately to the subliminal fear of the existential threat inevitable mortality.

I have written a lot. Over much. No one is going to read all that. Still, what I have written is basically one and the same idea expressed in an endless number of ways. To read a small part of what I have written is to have read it all. And to get the main idea is to see that the idea itself is other than any of it many expressions. I always think of Kosuth's Three Chairs - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_and_Three_Chairs

The conceptual art approach like that of poetry is beating around the bush with the faculty of intuition.
Surely the "truth" will strike some people but there is no consistency to it.

Rather than conceptual art, philosophy-proper using its various tools is more objective in getting to what is the deeper and more refined truth where the 'eureka' [epiphany] moment can be more orgasmic.

Mortality isn't really a cause of angst for me. You probably don't believe that, but oh well. Your understanding of conceptual art is minimal at best.

[Veritas Aequitas]

OK, this argument is going nowhere so I will deviate from that and speak about our existential crisis. As I see it the greatest cause of Angst among us now is information overload. There is no way we can make our way through all the videos and printed matter out there. It's too much. And it just keeps coming. More and more. What to do?

Re Information overload, that is merely a concern and uneasiness, there is no direct link to an existential threat.

The 'angst' I referred to is more towards 'existential angst'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angst

Heidegger and Kierkegaard angst is related to anxiety to fear and ultimately to the subliminal fear of the existential threat inevitable mortality.

I have written a lot. Over much. No one is going to read all that. Still, what I have written is basically one and the same idea expressed in an endless number of ways. To read a small part of what I have written is to have read it all. And to get the main idea is to see that the idea itself is other than any of it many expressions. I always think of Kosuth's Three Chairs - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_and_Three_Chairs

The conceptual art approach like that of poetry is beating around the bush with the faculty of intuition.
Surely the "truth" will strike some people but there is no consistency to it.

Rather than conceptual art, philosophy-proper using its various tools is more objective in getting to what is the deeper and more refined truth where the 'eureka' [epiphany] moment can be more orgasmic.

Mortality isn't really a cause of angst for me. You probably don't believe that, but oh well. Your understanding of conceptual art is minimal at best.

My understanding of conceptual art is sufficient where I have linked its definition before.

Note the difference between 'angst' [subliminal] and conscious fear and anxieties.

If 'mortality' is a conscious fear or anxiety for you, then you are suffering from a mental illness, i.e. thanatophobia.
This is why the majority of humans will openly and heroically declared they do not fear death [consciously] while being ignorant the inherent fear of death is brewing unconsciously and subliminally within their brain.

From evolution, all humans are "programmed" not to have a conscious fear of mortality except intermittently which disappear easily.
It is only the odd exceptions that have a persistent conscious fear of mortality and they are suffering from thanatophobia and they would need psychiatric help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_anx ... sychology)

All humans are programmed to avoid and fear death else they will be reckless and die easily, so this fear is suppressed subliminally and is expressed indirectly.
But the problem is the suppression is not total thus there are leakages subliminally and this is manifested as angst and anxieties where the source is not easily traceable.
Existential angst is like a terrible itch where one do not know where to scratch. But existential angst are more terrible pains and sufferings without a spot to scratch than the worst itch.

Thus the majority of human beings rely on the hit and miss [black box] methods to try to relieve the pains of the existential angst.
Religion and theism are determined to be the best balm to soothe the existential angst. The relief is immediate. Believed and viola! one is saved. Besides theism and religions there are other modes of beliefs [shamanism, magic, etc.] which you mentioned that would relieve the existential pains indirectly.

But as we had discussed, religions and theism has terrible cons [negatives] beside being a balm for the existential angst, but the trade off at present is in favor of the need of religion and theism to relieve the terrible pains of the existential angst.

However my point is;
the current trend is the negatives [cons] are outweighing it pros and thus there is a need to find fool proof alternatives to replace and wean off theism and religion and its associated negative baggage of evil and violence.

[tapaticmadness]

Re Information overload, that is merely a concern and uneasiness, there is no direct link to an existential threat.

The 'angst' I referred to is more towards 'existential angst'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angst

Heidegger and Kierkegaard angst is related to anxiety to fear and ultimately to the subliminal fear of the existential threat inevitable mortality.


The conceptual art approach like that of poetry is beating around the bush with the faculty of intuition.
Surely the "truth" will strike some people but there is no consistency to it.

Rather than conceptual art, philosophy-proper using its various tools is more objective in getting to what is the deeper and more refined truth where the 'eureka' [epiphany] moment can be more orgasmic.

Mortality isn't really a cause of angst for me. You probably don't believe that, but oh well. Your understanding of conceptual art is minimal at best.

My understanding of conceptual art is sufficient where I have linked its definition before.

Note the difference between 'angst' [subliminal] and conscious fear and anxieties.

If 'mortality' is a conscious fear or anxiety for you, then you are suffering from a mental illness, i.e. thanatophobia.
This is why the majority of humans will openly and heroically declared they do not fear death [consciously] while being ignorant the inherent fear of death is brewing unconsciously and subliminally within their brain.

From evolution, all humans are "programmed" not to have a conscious fear of mortality except intermittently which disappear easily.
It is only the odd exceptions that have a persistent conscious fear of mortality and they are suffering from thanatophobia and they would need psychiatric help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_anx ... sychology)

All humans are programmed to avoid and fear death else they will be reckless and die easily, so this fear is suppressed subliminally and is expressed indirectly.
But the problem is the suppression is not total thus there are leakages subliminally and this is manifested as angst and anxieties where the source is not easily traceable.
Existential angst is like a terrible itch where one do not know where to scratch. But existential angst are more terrible pains and sufferings without a spot to scratch than the worst itch.

Thus the majority of human beings rely on the hit and miss [black box] methods to try to relieve the pains of the existential angst.
Religion and theism are determined to be the best balm to soothe the existential angst. The relief is immediate. Believed and viola! one is saved. Besides theism and religions there are other modes of beliefs [shamanism, magic, etc.] which you mentioned that would relieve the existential pains indirectly.

But as we had discussed, religions and theism has terrible cons [negatives] beside being a balm for the existential angst, but the trade off at present is in favor of the need of religion and theism to relieve the terrible pains of the existential angst.

However my point is;
the current trend is the negatives [cons] are outweighing it pros and thus there is a need to find fool proof alternatives to replace and wean off theism and religion and its associated negative baggage of evil and violence.

Your psychological analysis is nothing more than textbook fluff.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Mortality isn't really a cause of angst for me. You probably don't believe that, but oh well. Your understanding of conceptual art is minimal at best.

My understanding of conceptual art is sufficient where I have linked its definition before.

Note the difference between 'angst' [subliminal] and conscious fear and anxieties.

If 'mortality' is a conscious fear or anxiety for you, then you are suffering from a mental illness, i.e. thanatophobia.
This is why the majority of humans will openly and heroically declared they do not fear death [consciously] while being ignorant the inherent fear of death is brewing unconsciously and subliminally within their brain.

From evolution, all humans are "programmed" not to have a conscious fear of mortality except intermittently which disappear easily.
It is only the odd exceptions that have a persistent conscious fear of mortality and they are suffering from thanatophobia and they would need psychiatric help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_anx ... sychology)

All humans are programmed to avoid and fear death else they will be reckless and die easily, so this fear is suppressed subliminally and is expressed indirectly.
But the problem is the suppression is not total thus there are leakages subliminally and this is manifested as angst and anxieties where the source is not easily traceable.
Existential angst is like a terrible itch where one do not know where to scratch. But existential angst are more terrible pains and sufferings without a spot to scratch than the worst itch.

Thus the majority of human beings rely on the hit and miss [black box] methods to try to relieve the pains of the existential angst.
Religion and theism are determined to be the best balm to soothe the existential angst. The relief is immediate. Believed and viola! one is saved. Besides theism and religions there are other modes of beliefs [shamanism, magic, etc.] which you mentioned that would relieve the existential pains indirectly.

But as we had discussed, religions and theism has terrible cons [negatives] beside being a balm for the existential angst, but the trade off at present is in favor of the need of religion and theism to relieve the terrible pains of the existential angst.

However my point is;
the current trend is the negatives [cons] are outweighing it pros and thus there is a need to find fool proof alternatives to replace and wean off theism and religion and its associated negative baggage of evil and violence.

Your psychological analysis is nothing more than textbook fluff.

The above is merely babbling from you, any solid arguments to counter my points?
That goes to show you need to read more widely and think deeper than your current state.

At least my points are supported by evidence and arguments.

[tapaticmadness]

My understanding of conceptual art is sufficient where I have linked its definition before.

Note the difference between 'angst' [subliminal] and conscious fear and anxieties.

If 'mortality' is a conscious fear or anxiety for you, then you are suffering from a mental illness, i.e. thanatophobia.
This is why the majority of humans will openly and heroically declared they do not fear death [consciously] while being ignorant the inherent fear of death is brewing unconsciously and subliminally within their brain.

From evolution, all humans are "programmed" not to have a conscious fear of mortality except intermittently which disappear easily.
It is only the odd exceptions that have a persistent conscious fear of mortality and they are suffering from thanatophobia and they would need psychiatric help.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_anx ... sychology)

All humans are programmed to avoid and fear death else they will be reckless and die easily, so this fear is suppressed subliminally and is expressed indirectly.
But the problem is the suppression is not total thus there are leakages subliminally and this is manifested as angst and anxieties where the source is not easily traceable.
Existential angst is like a terrible itch where one do not know where to scratch. But existential angst are more terrible pains and sufferings without a spot to scratch than the worst itch.

Thus the majority of human beings rely on the hit and miss [black box] methods to try to relieve the pains of the existential angst.
Religion and theism are determined to be the best balm to soothe the existential angst. The relief is immediate. Believed and viola! one is saved. Besides theism and religions there are other modes of beliefs [shamanism, magic, etc.] which you mentioned that would relieve the existential pains indirectly.

But as we had discussed, religions and theism has terrible cons [negatives] beside being a balm for the existential angst, but the trade off at present is in favor of the need of religion and theism to relieve the terrible pains of the existential angst.

However my point is;
the current trend is the negatives [cons] are outweighing it pros and thus there is a need to find fool proof alternatives to replace and wean off theism and religion and its associated negative baggage of evil and violence.

Your psychological analysis is nothing more than textbook fluff.

The above is merely babbling from you, any solid arguments to counter my points?
That goes to show you need to read more widely and think deeper than your current state.

At least my points are supported by evidence and arguments.

Who do you think understands life better: an academic psychologist who attends seminars and presents papers or a street boy who is looking to sell his butt to make a few bucks? Obviously, it's the second.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Who do you think understands life better: an academic psychologist who attends seminars and presents papers or a street boy who is looking to sell his butt to make a few bucks? Obviously, it's the second.

You had jumped to conclusion without defining and explaining 'what is life' the meaning of life and the purpose of life.

Obviously the academic psychologist who attends seminars and presents papers defining and explaining 'what is life' the meaning of life and the purpose of life and strive to live life to the optimal best would be the one who understand life better.

[tapaticmadness]

Who do you think understands life better: an academic psychologist who attends seminars and presents papers or a street boy who is looking to sell his butt to make a few bucks? Obviously, it's the second.

You had jumped to conclusion without defining and explaining 'what is life' the meaning of life and the purpose of life.

Obviously the academic psychologist who attends seminars and presents papers defining and explaining 'what is life' the meaning of life and the purpose of life and strive to live life to the optimal best would be the one who understand life better.

The observation you gave sounded superficial and bookish.

[tapaticmadness]

Who do you think understands life better: an academic psychologist who attends seminars and presents papers or a street boy who is looking to sell his butt to make a few bucks? Obviously, it's the second.

You had jumped to conclusion without defining and explaining 'what is life' the meaning of life and the purpose of life.

Obviously the academic psychologist who attends seminars and presents papers defining and explaining 'what is life' the meaning of life and the purpose of life and strive to live life to the optimal best would be the one who understand life better.

If you are somewhere in lockdown, you might enjoy watching these videos about The Little Buddha. He really was quite a phenomenon. I have asked Buddhist scholars where he is now, but no one seems to know ... or they aren't saying.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nG5FqQKrrHI

And here is the first of five videos against him - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFC4y-zJrpM

It's easy to find more videos against him and the blue monks. I personally rather like him and I tend to believe he is real.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Who do you think understands life better: an academic psychologist who attends seminars and presents papers or a street boy who is looking to sell his butt to make a few bucks? Obviously, it's the second.

You had jumped to conclusion without defining and explaining 'what is life' the meaning of life and the purpose of life.

Obviously the academic psychologist who attends seminars and presents papers defining and explaining 'what is life' the meaning of life and the purpose of life and strive to live life to the optimal best would be the one who understand life better.

If you are somewhere in lockdown, you might enjoy watching these videos about The Little Buddha. He really was quite a phenomenon. I have asked Buddhist scholars where he is now, but no one seems to know ... or they aren't saying.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nG5FqQKrrHI

And here is the first of five videos against him - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFC4y-zJrpM

It's easy to find more videos against him and the blue monks. I personally rather like him and I tend to believe he is real.

I was following the News of the Buddha Boy when he first emerged till he started a following. Was not aware his monks wore blue.

My first view is that boy should not be associated with Buddha at all.
As with all past [not present] religions in alignment with believers expectations, there is a need for a founder which in all cases are purely mythical.
The Buddha Story was merely a MYTH to represent the core principles, teachings, doctrines and practices of Buddhism. There was no real prince then who gave up his rights to a Kingdom and became an ascetic.
It is fishy for those having interests to associate the 'boy' with 'Buddha' and copying Buddha's meditation under a Bodhi tree.

The Buddha Boy was merely performing to attract the ignorant, gullible and vulnerable lay-believers. These sort of performance-based approach are typical of many pseudo Godman, e.g. Sai Baba and others.

Regardless of whoever and whatever the "divine" person claim to perform, what counts for me are the substance, i.e. the core principles, teachings, doctrines and 'spiritual' practices s/he present.
As with Buddha and Buddhism we can read the soundness of his core principles, doctrines, arguments and test his practices.

The so-called Buddha Boy presented no sound core principles, doctrines, argument and practices of his own other than borrowed from the existing Buddhism.
What he presented was merely forms and external outward performance but has no substance to it.
The Buddha Boy or his opportunistic organization was exploiting those who will exercise blind faith rather than use reason, rationality and wisdom as their option to follow or not-to-follow the Buddha Boy.

This is why I prefer.
.. the academic psychologist who attends seminars and presents papers defining and explaining 'what is life' the meaning of life and the purpose of life and strive to live life to the optimal best would be the one who understand life better..
where I can use my discretion to review his arguments and test his theories.